The issue of secrecy has a long and proud tradition in this country.  It is totally endemic in the political culture, and none more so than in Whitehall.  I’m sure it has its uses, and that many a difficult political decision has been aided and abetted by widespread ignorance of the facts.  Ufologists in Britain are, frankly, outflanked by the Official Secrets Act and the lack of a constitutional right to information.  Even so, some, such as Nick Redfern, have been successful at exposing lies and cover-ups by HM Government when it comes to UFOs and related phenomena.  But it’s clear that the vast wealth of information on the subject has not yet come to light.

Perhaps the current passage of the first ever Freedom of In formation Act through the Commons will see an end to the secrecy.  Well, we can live in hope, but somehow I doubt it.  Commentators have already drubbed it as grossly inadequate, and that’s not even counting the numerous exemptions available to the censors.  UFOs present as a national security issue, so forget finding out anything about our Government’s alleged investigation of them.  Even though Whitehall dismisses cases on the basis that they have no defence significance.  So it's lose/lose, I'm afraid.

But not to be totally downhearted, we British can access information about the nefarious machinations of our illustrious government through another source.  That’s right, the American Freedom of Information Act!  The U.S. Government, sadly constrained by their constitution, has produced a fine piece of legislature here with which to beat its own back. And Britain’s, too.  U.S. Government disclosures, through the U.S. F.O.I.A., have gone a long way to dispel the myth that they aren’t interested in the subject of UFOs.  The N.S.A. continues to refuse to release their mountain of data on the subject, in the interests of national security.  Although UFOs aren’t supposed to be a threat, or even exist.

 F.O.I.A. disclosures about the Rendlesham Forest incident forced British defence chiefs to admit that something strange had indeed occurred near the US controlled air-bases of Woodbridge and Bentwaters, but that they weren’t quite sure what.  Previously they had denied all knowledge, although the alleged close encounter had occurred on British soil.  We await, with baited breath, the torrent of information that will surely emerge when the British (or is it English, in our complex island of devolution) F.O.I.A. gets its first airing.

It’s a case of the door being shut after the horse has bolted, but criticism has been levelled by the Common’s Foreign Affairs Committee at the Government, for its co-operation with the US defence system. Citing its limited effectiveness and cost, as well as the massive diplomatic damage the system is causing with the Russians and Chinese, the committee advised the Government to think carefully before involving themselves in this project. “British co-operation should not be a fore-gone conclusion”, explained a spokesman for the committee on BBC Radio’s ‘Today’ programme this morning. He went on to describe how it would be "destabilising with respect to strategic arms initiatives". The very need for this system was also questioned in light of the American recent decision to down-grade North Korea’s threat as a rogue state. Since the end of the Cold War it has become difficult for the West to clearly identify a coherent threat. Iraq is contained, Libya is softening and Iran has seen a recent liberalisation politically. Now that North Korea is slowly moving towards acceptance by the International Community, the ‘enemy’ is difficult to define. Yet the means to battle this unseen threat continues to escalate, in terms of advanced ‘Star Wars’ weaponry and early warning systems.

It seems to us, at ‘Cosmic Conspiracies’, that the pariah states are held up as a cover for something more ominous, and the strategic need for the RAF Fylingdales facility offers us a clue. The threat isn’t from rogue states, but from space. ‘Son of Star Wars’ is about dealing with rapid vehicles trespassing into our air-space, with a continual network of space tracking and monitoring to pick up an in-coming threat. It’s importance to the American political establishment is not to be under-estimated, as can be seen by the Republican Party’s recent undertaking to go ahead with implementation of the system as quickly as possible; a commitment made, bizarrely, in a climate of decreasing threat from ‘rogue states’. We allege that this anti-UFO system is being ‘sold’ to the people of the West under false pretences, and several leading British politicians are beginning to wake up to this deception. Whether this is a case of ‘too-little, too-late’ remains to be seen.

Three months earlier, MoD documents record that a commercial pilot flying over the Midlands reported an unusual object travelling at 'very high speed' with a very bright strobe light flashing once every 20 seconds.

Although the two incidents were unrelated, both were reported to a little-known department in the Ministry of Defence, known as Secretariat (Air Staff) 2a. This is the secretive section in Whitehall which collates reports of unidentified flying objects that cross British airspace.

Whitehall has traditionally treated reports of UFO sightings as highly classified and only released information to the public after 30 years. But the parliamentary Ombudsman insisted that the MoD hand this information to Colin Ridyard, a research chemist from Wales.

Dr Ridyard had been seeking information relating to UFO sightings by pilots or radar operators between July 1998 and July 1999. Initially the MoD refused on the ground it would be too expensive. But after the intervention of the ombudsman, Michael Buckley, the MoD agreed to release the information as a one-off exercise for £75. The Ministry handed two reports to Ridyard, yet official information from the Civil Aviation Authority suggests there had been additional sightings. During the same period the CAA said it reported two more UFO sightings to the MoD, neither of which the Ministry disclosed.

According to official CAA reports, in the same month that a radar picked up an enormous object flying across Scotland, a pilot flying over the North Sea became startled when his aircraft became illuminated by an 'incandescent' light. Three other aircraft in the area reported seeing a ball of light moving at high speed. Air traffic controllers reported there were no strange aircraft in the area, but five minutes later an operator at a weather station picked up a fast-moving object on his radar.

The other incident which CAA reported to the MoD occurred in June 1999 when the pilot of a B757 flying over the North Sea reported an unidentified military-looking aircraft passing close by in the opposite direction. Nothing was seen on the plane's radar or by air traffic controllers. The MoD told the Authority that there were no military aircraft known to be in that area at the time.

Although an MoD spokeswoman would not discuss individual sightings, she said all these events had perfectly normal explanations. 'Some-times radars have spurious readings caused by military aircraft in the vicinity, and radar-jamming facilities and bright lights on the underside of aircraft can be caused by events on the ground.'

In a letter to one of Ridyard's local MPs, Defence Minister John Spellar said: 'My department has no interest or role with respect to UFO/flying saucer matters or to the question of the existence or otherwise of extraterrestrial life forms - about which we remain open-minded.'

However, declassified government documents in the Public Records Office from June 1965 reveal that 'it was official MoD policy to play down the subject of unidentified flying objects and to avoid attaching undue public attention or publicity to the subject... as a result we have never had any political pressure to mount a large-scale investigation'. Other documents from that time state: 'The press are never to be given information about unusual radar sightings and [unusual visual] sightings are in no circumstances to be disclosed to the press.'

But Ridyard said: 'This is not about little green men, but about freedom of information. It is clear there are many strange incidents that happen in the British skies that are kept secret. There may be issues of aircraft safety or natural phenomena, but by keeping this information secret these incidents cannot be scrutinised by the public or the scientific community.'

One of the most infamous incidents relating to a UFO sighting in Britain only came to light through US freedom of information legislation. This revealed that in December 1980 three security patrolmen investigating a potential air crash near the US Air Force base in Suffolk saw a strange glowing triangular object hovering in the forest near the base which had a 'pulsing red light on top and blue lights underneath'.

An official report by Lieutenant-Colonel Charles Halt , the deputy base commander, included a description of the events and stated that the next day three depressions were found in the forest where the object was discovered which showed radiation readings. Later that night three star-like objects were seen in the sky moving 'rapidly in sharp angular movements'. (See our RAF Bentwaters section for the complete story, video and audio tape of the events that happened in Rendlesham forest in 1980.)
 

Researchers who ask for pertinent records from the US Air Force about UFOs are provided with a 'Fact Sheet' which states that since the closure of Project Blue Book in 1974, the USAF has no interest in, and does not study, the subject. The USAF information pack refers inquirers to various non-governmental UFO research organizations which are closely monitored, and, at times, directed by various US intelligence and military agencies.(1)

All the official records made public under the UFO title are unevaluated reports gathered through various human intelligence means. These reports always quote the term UFO, as it has been relayed to them by sources. Mostly these sources are civilians, unaware of the current official terminology used by the US government. The US military uses two main terms in compiling and studying the UFO subject: Uncorrelated Targets (UCT), for earth-bound unidentified objects, and Uncorrelated Event Reports (UER) for space related events. I wrote to North American Aerospace Defense Command, NORAD, about their terminology.

They replied:

'Historically, the term UFO was used by the Air Force starting in 1947 and ending in 1974 with the shelving of the "Blue Book" project. We all know what the term UFO means, we just don't use it.....
The specific term "UFO" is not used by this command even though you could say that this term would equate to UTR [unknown track report], either an uncorrelated event or an unknown track, since an unidentified flying object could be considered either.'(3)
 
Further, I was told, 'Uncorrelated Events Reports (UERs), which are space related events on the United States Space Command (USSPACECOM) side of the house, are always classified SECRET.' (4)

Uncorrelated Targets are categorised as:

Significant UCTs, Nonsignificant UCTs, Critical UCTs, and False UCTs. (5)

Copies of any serious UCT event are sent to the Missions Systems Integration Board (MSIB). MSIB is composed of all NORAD and US Space Command directorates and senior level representatives from Naval Space Command, Army Space Command and Air Force Space Command. (6) The regulations governing the UFO topic is USR 55-12, Space Surveillance Network (SSN) of June 1 1992, classified by multiple sources.

'This regulation provides policy and guidance for operations of the worldwide Space Surveillance Network (SSN). It applies to Headquarters US Space Command; the component commands, Headquarters Air Force Space Command; the Naval Space Command, and Army Space Command; the Space Surveillance Centre (SSC), the Alternative Space Surveillance Centre (ASSC); and the SSN sensors except RAF Fyling dales. RAF Fyling dales follows guidance specified in SR55-122/88771/1/GE(s),  Joint USAF/RAF Operations Manual (JOM) Ballistic Missiles Early Warning System (BMEWS) Site III, RAF, England.' (7)

In conjunction with this regulation exists US Space Command Regulation 55-20, Warning Verification of Hostile Space Events, dated 31 January 1990, classified secret.

'This regulation establishes procedures to provide timely and accurate status reporting, warning and verification of hostile space events to National Command Authorities (NCA), collateral agencies, space system owners and operators, and defense forces from Headquarters, US Space Command, Space Defense Operations Center (SPADOC).'

Although the US Space Command is the Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) '...for records relating to Uncorreletated Targets....the evaluations [of reports are] made by the Command Director and the Air Defense Operations Center of Cheyenne Mountain Air Station on the Unknown Track data'. (8)

The Air Defense Operations Center (ADOC) is a NORAD entity. (9)

All Unknown Track Reports (UTRs) are recorded on NORAD's Form 61, and kept for five years. Data from these files, in summary form, is sent to all relevant government agencies on a need-to-know basis. (10)

NORAD commented, 'Normally 80% of NORAD unknowns are identified. The remaining 20% continues to be called un-known and no further action is taken.' (13) Another category of reports come from USAF personnel. These reports might be generated by using the International Urgency Signal, PAN, or by ground relay of airborne reports or post-landing reports using FLASH procedure, and are governed by Communication Instructions Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings (CIRVIS). These reports are maintained in places such as Tyndall Air Force Base (1st Air force), Elmendorf Air Force Base (11th Air force) and NORAD's Canadian headquarters in Ontario, Canada.

These reports are compiled in accordance with the Air Force Manual, where it states:

'Report the following specific sightings:

Hostile or unidentified aircraft which appears directed against the United States, Canada, or their forces. Missiles, Unidentified Flying Objects, Hostile Flying Objects, Hostile or Unidentified military surface missiles or sub-marines.' (14)

As to any specific terms adopted by NORAD in the course of pilot/radar control communication exchange for UFOs, the answer is 'Unknown Track'. (15)

I asked NORAD if the recovery of downed UFOs was within their jurisdiction - if so which particular teams, or components deal with it? If not, which other particular teams or components, and from which command has such authority? The answer was:

'We do not deal with down unknowns, which you refer to as UFOs. Normally, local law enforcement officials and/or security personnel from the nearest military installation get involved with downed aircraft etc. until positive identification is made. Then the vehicle is turned over to its primary agency and/or organisation.'

In contrast to the MOD's repeated assertion that UFOs are not considered a threat to national security, for the US Government 'all unknown tracks are considered a possible threat until proven otherwise.' (16)

NORAD informed me that although there are no British forces assigned to NORAD facilities, 'the British Ministry of Defence does interface and cooperate with NORAD and the United State Space Command (USSPACECOM), on military space systems as they provide support to the warfighter.' (17)

Although 'there are no NORAD facilities outside the Continental United States (CONUS) and Canada....NORAD does receive classified data from England.' (18)
 

Footnotes

1. My archives contain several military intelligence records of unevaluated reports on UFO conferences and symposia. Most of the better known UFO organizations have deep, as well as casual, penetration by both military and intelligence agencies. This has been brought to my attention on several occasions by individuals who were assigned to such missions.

2. This information was made available to me prior to the declassification of the NRO in 1993.

3. NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) letter to author 19 December 1995.

4. NORAD letter to author November 13 1995

5. US Space Command correspondence 28 April 1993 to author

6 US Space Command letter to author 7 April 1994

6. US Space Command letter to author 7 April 1994

7. US Space Command Regulation USR 55-12, Space Surveillance Network (SSN) June 1 1992
8. US Space Command correspondence with author, 21 July 1995.

9. Ibid. 'The North American Aerospace Defense command (NORAD) is a bi-national Command established by international agreement (33 United States Treaties 1277), and is subject to control by both US and Canadian executive agencies. It is not a US Government agency as defined in the ACT, and consequently, it is not subject to the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).'

10. NORAD letter to author 13 November 1995.

11. NORAD letter to author 24 August 1995.

12. Current NORAD records in the author's possession.

13. NR 55-1, Aerospace Reporting System has been revised and altered to 55-14, written by NORAD operators (Nj30G) in the Space Control Centre of Cheyenne Mountain Air Station. NORAD communications of 3 and 13 May 1994 to author.

14. Air Force Manual 10-206, September 1 1995, Operational Reporting, chapter 5, para 5.7.3

15. NORAD letter of 16 December 1995 to author

16. Ibid.

17. NORAD communication with author 17 March 1994

Fact: on July 9, 1947, Brigadier General George Schulgen, Chief of the Air Intelligence Requirements Division of the Army Air Corps Intelligence, asked the FBI to help investigate the saucer reports. He wanted to know if the reports were the result of attempts by communist sympathizers or Soviet agents in the USA to cause hysteria and fear of a secret Russian weapon. Were the witnesses providing honest reports or were they publicity seekers? Did they have a political agenda? The general wanted the FBI to try to answer these questions.

Schulgen told the FBI that his intelligence organization was usingall of its scientists to determine whether or not such a phenomenon could, in fact, occur. He said that he and several scientists and a psychologist, had interrogated an Air Force pilot who saw one. Under the intense questioning the pilot was adamant in his claim that he saw flying disc. He said that the research is being conducted with the thought that the flying objects might be celestial phenomenon and with the view that they might be a foreign body mechanically devised and controlled. In other words, the the craft might have a foreign origin (i.e., from Russia) or a celestial origin. (This would not be the last time the FBI would learn of the possibility of acelestial origin!) Gen. Schulgen assured the FBI that there was no defense project that could account for flying disc reports and offered to work closely with the FBI. He said he would make available to the FBI reports of his scientists and findings of the various Air Corps installations and if the Bureau would cooperate with him in this matter, he would offer all facilities of his office as to results obtained in the effort to identify and run down this matter.

Fact: Hoover said "I would do it!"

Assistant Director D. M. Ladd thought that interviewing saucer witnesses was a bad idea, it being noted that a great bulk of those alleged discs reported found have been pranks. However, Clyde Tolson, Hoover's right hand man (and that's not all!), disagreed. I think we should do this, he wrote to Hoover. Hoover agreed with Tolson, but under a certain condition: I would do it, but first we must have access to all discs recovered. For example, in the La. case the Army grabbed it and would not let us have it for cursory examination. Hoover required access to any disc recovered because it was the job of the FBI, through it's laboratory facilities, to determine the origin of the parts which made up the disc. If some of the parts did not originate in the USA then there was the possibility that the disc was a form of sabotage or psychological warfare being waged against the USA by a foreign country.

The phrase "La. case" refers to a hoax device found in Shreveport, Louisiana on July 7. Someone had put together a model "flying saucer" and tossed it into someone else's back yard as a joke. Army intelligence agents had learned of it and had retrieved it for analysis before the local FBI agent had a chance to look at it. Nothing unusual was found.... some electronic parts and stuff with the words "Made in USA" written on it. The Shreveport case was not the only such hoax case in the FBI files from this time period. Apparently some people thought the saucer sightings were a complete joke and decided to have some fun at other people's expense. The files indicate a dozen or so hoaxes among the hundreds of honest reports.

Hoover officially approved of Tolson's recommendation and thus began a two month period of official investigation followed by many years in which the FBI collected UFO related information from the Air Force and other sources. The FBI, with its penchant for collecting all sorts of information that might be of value to Hoover, did all this secretly. In 1976, when I requested any UFO information that the FBI might have, for release under the newly passed Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIPA), I didn’t expect to get anything. There had never been explicit evidence that the FBI was ever involved with UFO investigations. One person who should have known was Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt, the first director of Project Blue Book (to be described). He wrote a history of the first eight years of Air Force flying saucer investigations, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects (Doubleday, New York, 1956). According to Ruppelt, the FBI was never officially interested in UFO sightings. Therefore I was surprised to learn that there were well over a thousand pages of UFO related material in the FBI's "X-file".

I found that the FBI file provides a unique viewpoint on the early Air Force investigation because it contains comments by Air Force officers who were involved right at the beginning. The FBI file even contains some early records not in the files of Project Blue Book, which is supposed to be the complete, official Air Force collection of UFO sightings and documents!

Agents had been sending unofficial reports on saucers to headquarters for several weeks when, on July 30, 1947, a message went out to all the local offiices:
 
"You should investigate each instance which is brought to your attention of a sighting of a flying disc in order to ascertain whether or not it is a bona fide sighting, an imaginary one or a prank...... The bureau should be notified immediately by teletype of all reported sightings and the results of your inquiries... ."

The directive also specified that FBI agents should provide copies of their reports to the Air Force investigators. Over the next two months the FBI interviewed more than a dozen witnesses and found no evidence of subversion but they did find evidence of flying saucers.

This information is now contained in the files labelled "Flying Discs". Many of the documents are entitled "SECURITY MATTER - X" ------***the REAL X file***

For example:
 
REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS September 17, 1947

SECURITY MATTER - X

 The above heading introduces the FBI interview of Fred Johnson, a prospector, who wrote a letter to the Air Force in which he said he had seen the same objects that Kenneth Arnold had seen at about the same time during the afternoon of June 24. Arnold had reported seeing nine semicircular, flat shiny objects fly southward at high speed past Mt. Rainier, an extinct volcano in the State of Washington. These objects disappeared from his view near Mt. Adams, about 50 miles south of Mt. Rainier. The Air Force asked the FBI to interview Mr. Johnson. He told the FBI that during the afternoon of June 24 he was prospecting near Mount Adams. He saw the saucers fly overhead. Mr. Johnson was the first person known to have observed flying saucers through a telescope. He confirmed Arnold's description of the overall shape and high speed and said that they appeared to him to be about 30 feet in diameter. He said they tilted back and forth as they flew and he last saw them "standing on edge" as they flew into a cloud. He also reported that while these objects were in his vicinity the needle of his compass wobbled back and forth. Mr. Johnson told the FBI he had not learned of Arnold's sighting until several days later and he had written to the Air Force to "lend credence" to Arnold's sighting. The FBI agent noted at the end of his report that Johnson "appeared to be a very reliable individual" who been prospecting in the northwestern United States for forty years.
 

NOTE TO THE READER REGARDING THE ABOVE REPORT:

In the Project Blue Book records, which are listed in historical order, Fred Johnson's sighting occupies a unique position: it is the *first* of about 700 UFO reports that were not explained by the Air Force by the time Project Blue Book closed in 1969! (Project Blue Book, 1952-1969, and its predecessors, Project Sign, 1948-1949, and Project Grudge, 1949-1952, were publicly known efforts of the Air Force to collect and categorize UFO sightings. The files of these projects were microfilmed and released to the National Archives in 1975.)

Inasmuch as Arnold's sighting preceded Johnson's by a minute or so, the astute reader may ask why Arnold's sighting is not the first unexplained sighting (and Johnson's the second)? The answer is that the Air Force analysts claim to have explained Arnold's sighting! Of course, this is illogical: the objects seen by Arnold and Johnson couldn't be both explained and unexplained. This is the first, but by no means the last, example of illogical treatment of UFO sightings by the Air Force. (Note: the nearly 50 year old Air Force explanation of Arnold's sighting, that he saw a mirage, has been proven wrong. See the file "Analysis of the First Sighting" in the MUFON library, uploaded 8/15/95.)

The Air Force had its own secret "X" file which was not released along with the famous files of Project Blue Book which were deposited at the National Archives in 1975(this microfilm file contains the documents from Project Sign - 1948, Project Grudge - 1949-1951, and Project Blue Book - 1952-1969, all of which were sighting analysis projects carried out by personnel of the Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) - now Foreign Technology Division - at Wright Patterson AFB). Much of the information from the AF "X" file has been released only in the last 10 years.

An important part of the secret non-Blue Book information was discussed by Capt. E.J. Ruppelt, the first director of Project Blue Book. This Top Secret Estimate of the Situation was, according to Ruppelt, written by Air Force intelligence personnel at ATIC and sent to General Hoyt Vandenburg, Chief of Staff of the Air Force. The Estimate stated that saucers were interplanetary vehicles.

According to Ruppelt, the Top Secret Estimate was passed, without comment, upward through the ranks to General Vandenburg. General Vandenburg then rejected it for "lack of proof." A group of military officials from Project Sign then went to the Pentagon to discuss the Estimate with Vandenburg but, according to Ruppelt, were not able to convince him. Apparently Vandenburg ordered the men to reject the interplanetary hypothesis in spite of the conclusions they reached from sighting report analysis. Furthermore, if they knew about hard evidence (Roswell crash), then I speculate that Vandenburg ordered them to never mention its existence in any document.

Lets suppose the aircraft and intelligence experts at ATIC/Project Sign really didn't know about any hard evidence (Roswell) yet honestly arrived at the interplanetary conclusion. Why wouldn't Vandenburg accept it? Why tell the experts that, in spite of months of analytical work, they were wrong? Was he truly unconvinced by their logic or did he have a hidden agenda? Was he trying to cover something up? Methinks he did protest too much!

Since there is no documentation which answers these questions I can only speculate that he didn't want the ET conclusion to be accepted because, if it were accepted, flying saucer reality, with all the attendant consequences, would become official Air Force policy. The conclusion might then leak out and the Air Force would have to admit to the American people that alien craft were flying around and the Air Force could do nothing about it.

Note: the rejection of the Estimate was a real "watershed event" in the history of flying saucers because if Vandenburg had accepted saucer reality, this reality it would have become AF policy and the whole tenor of the AF projects in the years following would have been different from what actually occurred.

When the Estimate was rejected for "lack of proof" the lieutenants, captains and colonels and other personnel working at ATIC were disappointed because they had done their best to understand the nature of flying saucers. These people were the acknowledged experts in understanding foreign aircraft technology and they had worked diligently to understand the flying saucers. It had taken them months, using their best logical reasoning, to arrive at an answer and then Vandenburg, in a discussion which couldn't have lasted more than several hours, and may have lasted less than an hour, had rejected their answer. He had essentially told them, you guys worked hard but, Sorry, wrong answer. They knew that Vandenburg, because of his rank at the top of the military establishment, knew things they didn't. Perhaps they assumed that he rejected the ET conclusion because he knew the objects were something else, although they couldn't imagine what since they had already considered and rejected the "secret US project" and the "advanced foreign aircraft" theories. Perhaps they assumed Vandenburg rejected it simply because he couldn’t deal with the consequences of acceptance. Whatever the reasons, they were sent home with orders to try again. Sometime later the order came to destroy all copies of the ET Estimate. (Evidently at least one survived for Ruppelt to read about three years later, but then it, too, was destroyed.)

When a four star general speaks, lower generals, colonels, captains, etc., listen and act accordingly. The saucers appeared to be solid, mechanically engineered objects rather than natural phenomena or figments of the imagination. Therefore if they couldn't be extraterrestrial vehicles they had to be something else....man-made aircraft or missiles.

By late October the ATIC/Sign invesigators had settled on this as the only possible non-ET explanation. The problem then was to justify this explanation. Since they were not our missiles they had to be of foreign origin. The only way the investigators could imagine the missiles to be of foreign origin was if the Soviets had pushed German WWII technology far beyond anything that we had imagined. And yet, they could not really accept that either. They were confident that the USA had the most advanced aircraft technology. They were caught on the horns of a dilemma! Thus began the decline in quality of the Air Force flying saucer investigation, a decline that would not be reversed (temporarily) until 1952.

In early November, 1948, Col. Howard McCoy, at the request of the Chief of Air Force Intelligence, General Cabell, summarized the conclusions of the sighting analysis project ( Project "Sign") at the Air Materiel Command (Wright Patterson AFB). Note that McCoy was writing in the "aftermath" of the rejected Estimate:
 
a) In the majority of cases reported, observers have actually sighted some type of flying object which they cannot classify as an aircraft within the limits of their personal experience.
b) There is as yet no conclusive proof that unidentified flying objects, other than those which are known to be balloons, are real aircraft.
c) Although it is obvious that some types of flying objects have been sighted, the exact nature of those objects cannot be established until physical evidence, such as that which would result from a crash has been obtained."
 
These three paragraphs illustrate the confusion which set in when Vandenburg rejected the Estimate. In paragraphs (a) and (c) we find McCoy saying that observers actually sighted some types of flying objects, yet, in paragraph (b), he says there is no proof that these objects, other than balloons, are "real aircraft." Does this mean that the witnesses saw unreal aircraft which appeared real? Or does this mean that witnesses saw real objects which were not aircraft (i.e., not airplanes)?

Gen. Cabell's had also asked what, if anything, should be said to the press. Here is McCoy's response:
 
It is not considered advisable to present to the press information on those objects which we cannot yet identify or about which we cannot present any reasonable conclusions. In the event that they insist on some kind of statement, it is suggested that they be informed that many of the objects sighted have been identified as weather balloons or astral bodies, and that investigation is being pursued to determine reasonable explanations for the others.
 

Evidently Col. McCoy did not think it advisable to tell the American people the truth about the results of the saucer investigations! By advising Gen. Cabell to tell the American people what amounts to an untruth, McCoy was recommending that the Air Force avoid (some might say "chicken out" from ) facing up to the difficult issues that would be raised if the Air Force admitted that most of the sightings could not be explained. Instead, McCoy recommended a format for information release that became the basis of Air Force saucer information policy for most of the next twenty one years: (a) emphasize the explained sightings, (b) formulate statements which make it appear to the American people that most sightings can be explained, and (c) suggest that continued investigations will uncover explanations for those sightings not yet explained. In later years one more element would be added to this information release format: (d) state that the sightings which could not be explained simply had insufficient information for an explanation. (In 1952 this latter element was discovered to be untrue: many of the unexplained sightings had more than enough information to confirm a conventional explanation if such were possible. The Air Force continued to use this element of the standard format anyway.)

The FBI was not directly involved in saucer investigations after the fall of 1947. However, the FBI collected information volunteered by witnesses and by Air Force personnel. In early 1949 an Air Force colonel working at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, told the FBI that the saucers were REAL and were most likely MISSILES FROM THE SOVIET UNION! This information is contained within the FBI document which begins as follows:

TO: DIRECTOR FBI January 10, 1949
FROM: SAC , KNOXVILLE
SUBJECT: "FLYING SAUCERS" OBSERVED OVER OAK RIDGE AREA
INTERNAL SECURITY - X

According to this document there were films at Wright Patterson AFB which provided convincing evidence. The document also said that flying saucers had given "impetus" to the USAF attempt to develop an atomic powered airplane. This is in stark contrast to the public AF statements to the effect that saucer sightings were of no consequence.

Then a few weeks later the FBI was told about "green fireballs" seen near restricted military installations in the southwest.

TO: DIRECTOR , FBI Jan. 31, 1949
FROM: SAC, San Antonio
SUBJECT: PROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS

At recent Weekly Intelligence Conferences of G-2 (Army Intelligence), ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence), OSI (Air Force Office of Special Investigations) and FBI in the Fourth Army Area, Officers of G-2, Fourth army have discussed the matter of "Unidentified Aircraft" or "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena" otherwise known as "Flying Discs," "Flying Saucers," and "Balls of Fire." This matter is considered Top Secret by Intelligence Officers of both the Army and Air Forces.

Over the next few months the FBI was told that a top meteor expert believed that the "fireballs" were not natural phenomena but rather were atomic missiles developed by the Soviet Union which were being "sighted" on military installations involved with atomic bomb research, construction and storage. According to this expert, after the Soviets had determined the exact flight parrameters for the missiles the disintegating green "warheads" would be replaced by atomic bombs! This frightening information from the “inside” contradicted public AF statements that the fireballs (which had been reported by many civilians as well as by military security police) were (probably) natural phenomena.

Beside the green "fireballs" which were seen by hundreds of people, there were also the "disc variation" objects which were never explained.

The repeated appearances of these phenomena over military installations during 1949 finally caused the AF to set up Project Twinkle to obtain better data on these "fireballs." Project Twinkle began in April 1950.

During Project Twinkle the AF got movie film of saucers flying over the White Sands Missile Range in April, 1950. However, this film was ignored or covered up by Dr. Louis Elterman, a well known geophysicist working for the Air Force when he wrote the final report of Project Twinkle in November, 1951.

So you can understand where the writer of the Project Twinkle report was dishonest I reproduce here one part of it verbatim. Commenting on the "first contractual period, 1 April 1950 to 15 September 1950" Dr. Elterman wrote:
 
"Some photographic activity occurred on 27 April and 24 May, but simultaneous sightings by both cameras were not made, so that no information was gained. On 30 August 1950, during a Bell aircraft missile launching, aerial phenomena were observed over Holloman Air Force Base by several individuals; however, neither Land-Air nor Project personnel were notified and, therefore, no results were acquired. On 31 August 1950, the phenomena were again observed after a V-2 launching. Although much film was expended, proper triangulation was not effected, so that again no information was acquired."
 
According to Eltermann, on April 27 "simultaneous sightings by both cameras were not made" so a triangulation was not possible. (For a triangulation, whic allows for the calculation of distance, it is necessary to view an simultaneously from two locations.) Was Elterman justified in making such a comment?

Not just no, but Hell, No! A proper triangulation was accomplished, only Eltermann didn't mention it! Here is the document which reports it:
 
"Objects observed following MX776A test of 27 April 1950 2nd Lt. (name censored) EHOSIR 15 May 50

1. According to conversation between Col. Baynes and Capt. Bryant, the following information is submitted directly to Lt. Albert.
2. Film from station P10 was read, resulting in azimuth and elevation angles being recorded on four objects. In addition, size of image on film was recorded.
3. From this information, together with a single azimuth angle from station M7, the following conclusions were drawn:
a). The objects were at an altitude of approximately 150,000 ft.
b). The objects were over the Holloman range between the base and Tularosa Peak.
c). The objects were approximately 30 feet in diameter
d). The objects were traveling at an undeterminable, yet high speed.

(signed)
Wilbur L. Mitchell
Mathematician
Data Reduction Unit"
 
So, there you have it, four objects... UFOs... were flying over at 150,000 ft. Each was roughly 30 ft in size. Could Mr. Mitchell and the Askania operators have made a mistake? Not likely. Their business was tracking fast moving objects (rockets) and calculating the trajectories of the rockets. As the writer of the document which contains this report stated, "The individuals making these sightings are professional observers. Therefore I would rate their reliability superior."

Human beings had made no objects that could fly at 150,000 ft in the spring of 1950. So, what were they? Whose were they?

Farther on in the report Dr. Elterman indicates a serious deficiency in the operational plan for Project Twinkle. The project scientists knew that they might have some film to analyze, but according Elterman there were insufficient funds built into the contract to analyze the film. After a discussion with Mr. Warren Kott, who was in charge of the Land-Air operations, Elterman estimated that it would take 30 man-days to analyze the film and do a time correlation study which "would assure that these records did not contain significant material." According to Elterman, "no provisions are contained in the contract" for this analysis.

My response when I first read this was astonishment. WHAT? I said to myself. They set up a photographically instrumented search for unknown objects and then failed to provide for the film analysis if they were lucky enough to get film? What sort of a scientific project is that? Did they want to succeed or did they want to fail?

In the fall of 1950 the FBI learned of numerous sightings in the vicinity of the restricted installation at Oak Ridge where atomic bomb fuel was made. These sightings, many by security guards, alarmed the agencies such as the FBI and the AEC who were responsible for protecting Oak Ridge from sabotage.

It is a known fact that on December 6, 1950, at about 10:30 AM the United States almost went onto a high alert status. The public was told that the early warning radar had detected targets approaching the United States from the north of Canada. Later the press was told the alert was caused by birds or atmospheric effects. President Truman wrote about this event in his memoirs.

What the public was not told, and what was not learned until the late 1980's is that radar picked up solid objects and tracked them for many minutes as they headed southwestward along the east coast of Canada. Quite independently, a report of a UFO crash on Dec. 6, 1950, was made by an AF colonel to NICAP in the late 1970s. The colonel claimed he saw the object.

This would all be classified as amusing.... and certainly nothing provable except for a document found in the....you guessed it... X FILE:
 
"URGENT. DECEMBER 8. RE: FLYING SAUCERS. This office very confidentially advised by Army Intelligence, Richmond, that they have been put on immediate high alert for any data whatsoever concerning flying saucers. CIC here states background of instructions not available from Air Force Intelligence, who are not aware of reason for alert locally, but any information whatsoever must be telephoned by them immediately to Air Force Intelligence. CIC advises data strictly confidential and should not be diseminated."
 
The above is a teletype message from the FBI Agent in Richmond, Va. to FBI headquarters. THe FBI agent was told by a member of the Army's Counter Intelligence Corps that the corps was on high alert for saucer information. How very strange for the Counter Intelligence Corps to be put on immediate high alert for any data regarding objects/phenomena/craft which the Air Force claimed can all be explained and are no threat to the security of the United States! Are we to presume the CIC has nothing better to do than to run around chasing “will o’ the wisps” and similar ethereal things of no consequence to national defense? Of course not! This teletype message proves that Air Force Intelligence at the Pentagon, which requested the immediate high alert, considered the subject of flying saucers to be important..very important... contrary to the official ATIC opinion. Furthermore, the date of this message, only 2 days after the near high alert for the whole USA and only 2 days after a reported saucer crash.... suggests that there is a lot more to this story!!!!!!

1952 was the Year of the UFO. The Air Force received over 1,500 reports during that year, most between June and August. The continuing Project 1947 by Jan Aldrich (digging up as many newspaper stories as possible to find as many sightings as possible in 1947 and later years) has determined that this was a severe "undercount" by the Air Force.

At any rate, the Air Force and PRoject Blue Book personnel were driven nearly to distraction when the sighting rate began to exceed 20 reports per day, many from military pilots. On July 29, 1952, the Chief of Intelligence, General Samford, held a press conference to respond to the deluge of sightings. This was only a few days after the second flurry of sightings in the vicinity of Washington DC. AT the press conference Samford claimed that the DC sightings (involving radar and visual observations) were a result of "temperature inversions" (which cause radar beams to bend downward and detect objects on the ground...a theory which was rejected by the radar operators on duty at the time) and that other sightings were probably natural phenomena. HE said that after analyzing over a thousand sightings the only thing the AF was certain of was that the saucers were not a t hreat to the United States. The general tone of the press reports the next day was that the sightings were all optical illusions, atmospheric effects or other natural phenomena or hoaxes. This was a very important event for ufology because it more or less convinced the major organs of the skeptical press (radio and TV, too) that saucer sightings were basically a lot of "balony" caused by unreliable people. This confirmed a "tradition" which the AF had already been following for several years that most reports were honest misidentifications by inexperienced people. The general did not mention the pilot sightings at his press conference and there were no actual witnesses there who could confront him.

That's the story the general public was told. Behind closed doors... where the X files are kept.... the story was somewhat different!

The Director of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) wanted to know if some of the saucer stories in the press had been leaked by AF personnel. If so, and if there had been an intelligence breach it was his job to prosecute the "leakers". He sent a representative to the Office of the Director of Intelligence (Gen. Samford). He was told that many of the publishd stories had been released by the AF itself!! More importantly he was told the following:
 
"The Director of Intelligence advises that ***no theory exists*** at the present time as to the origin of the objects and they are considered to be unexplained. Much of the publicity has been based on authorized news releases by the Air Force."
 
Oops! Now the cat is out of the bag. "...no theory exists to explain the sightings which are considered to be unexplained."

I should point out that this was on the SAME DAY as the press conference mentioned above. That's clearly NOT what he told the press only a few hours later!

But, could this be an error? Was the AFOSI representative given incorrect information? ENTER THE FBI!!!

On the SAME day J. Edgar Hoover sent an agent to visit General Samford to find out what (the hell!) was going on! The agent was told by a staff person in General Samford's office, Commander Boyd ( Navy on detail to AF intel), that many sightings could be explained but about 3% COULD NOT. These were sightings which involved radar and visual from the air or ground...i.e., multiple witnesses and radar confirmation. Commander Boyd said that
 
".....the sightings in the (3%) category have never been satisfactorily explained. He pointed out, however, that it is still possible that these objects may be a natural phenomenon or some type of atmospheric disturbance. He advised that it is not entirely impossible that the objects sighted may possibly be ****ships from another planet such as Mars. **** (emphasis added) He advised that at the present time there is nothing to substantiate this theory but the the possibiity is not being overlooked. He stated that Air Intelligence is fairly certain that these objects are not ships or missiles from another nation in this world. Commander Boyd advised that intense research is being carried on presently by Air Intelligence, and at the present time when credible reportings of sightings are received , the Air force is attempting in each instance to send up jet interceptor planes in order to obtain a better view of these objects. However, recent attempts in this regard have indicated that when the pilot in the jet approaches the object it invariable fades from view."
 
Oops, again! Another cat out of the bag? Ships from another planet? If the press had found out what General Samford’s staff had told the FBI there would have been an explosion at the press conference!

In retrospect it appears that the good General told the American people a lie when he offered his opinion that the sightings could be explained as temperature inversions and implied that all sightings would be explained as natural phenomena. It was a lie because he didn't really believe it was all inversions and natural phenomena. There is no theory to explain these, the AFOSI was told. Did he lie simply to calm down the saucer hysteria? Or did he lie because the Top Brass didn’t want the American public to know that some Unidentified Flying Objects are ET craft?

Several months later the AF was confronted with the film by Navy officer Delbert Newhouse. The Newhouse film was analyzed by experts in the NAvy and AF. They could find no explanation for the objects. Publicly it, and the other 1952 sightings were poo- poohed. Provately? Enter, once again, the FBI. In late October, 1952, the FBI was told as follows:
 
"Colonel Young advised that Air Intelligence still feels that the so-called flying saucers are either optical illusions or atmospheric phenomena. He point out, however, that some Military officials are seriously considering the possibility of interplanetary ships."
 
Oops, again! Military officials are seriously considering interplanetary ships? Had this been published in the newspapers in 1952 the history of the UFO subject would be different!