UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > May > May 28


From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 13:32:09 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 08:54:20 -0400
Subject: Re: OSI CIA NSC MIT AF & UFOs - Hall

>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 18:25:09 EDT
>Subject: Re: British National Archives

>>From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 20:45:57 +0100
>>Subject: Re: British National Archives UFO Research Guide

>>I don't dispute that Clarke and Roberts were the first
>>ufologists to _claim_ that they obtained the documents. They've
>>_claimed_ to be the first to acquire all sorts of material; an
>>article in The Observer on May 5 2002 implied they uncovered a
>>CIA memo on UFOs written by Walter B. Smith, when in fact it was
>>published by Timothy Good in 1987, in his book Above Top Secret.


>In fact there was never any such secret CIA document written by
>CIA Director Walter B. Smith in the first place. This is a
>serious error of document analysis. Enthusiasts who desperately
>want an all-important CIA Director to seemingly be treating UFOs
>as a matter of national security have conveniently failed to
>read that this one-page document was a DRAFT written by a lower
>level CIA official (CIA OSI chief Chadwell) and sent to DCI
>Smith in Sept 1952 for his signature and for Smith to send it
>officially to the National Security Council (NSC).

>But Director Smith never signed the DRAFT and never sent any
>such thing off to the NSC. He quite obviously had rejected it!
>Chadwell kept re-sending the document for Smith's signature and
>urging him to approve OSI's heroic plan to take over the UFO
>problem from the AF and set up a government-wide serious
>scientific investigation of UFOs, to be directed by the
>illustrious MIT - in other words every UFO researcher's dream.
>However the enthusiasts refuse to be bothered with such minor
>matters as reading documents in context, reading chains of
>correspondence for responses and non-responses, discerning
>whether "attachments" are drafts and unapproved (or subsequently
>rejected by what we would call in legislative affairs a "pocket
>veto", you just sit on it and don't act within a period of time
>and it dies without having to make a public or even an internal
>official expression of rejection).

Now here comes the mind-boggling part:

>Rank-and-file UFO researchers also do not want the CIA to get
>any credit for a heroic role because they have already made up
>their minds that the CIA can only have a villainous role in the
>UFO controversy, the CIA can only be the evil agency behind the
>"sinister coverup" of proof of alien visitation, and that CIA
>officials were behind the despised Robertson Panel as
diabolical >ETH-denying debunkers.

The CIA officials were behind the UFO debunking, clearly and

>In fact the AF was behind the Robertson Panel and forced it on
>the CIA. The CIA did not want a hasty small panel rushing to
>judgment but wanted a _permanent_ ongoing full-scale scientific
>study of UFOs preferably at MIT. In fact CIA/OSI tried to
>postpone the Panel to give more time for Battelle's statistical
>study but got overruled by evident AF pressure on DCI Smith. The
>AF had gone over the CIA's heads in the first place to the IAC
>and manipulated orders for a quickie panel done as fast as

Note language highlighted *** by me (Hall)

>The AF tricked the CIA with ***deviously selected IFO cases***
>dressed up as the "best" UFOs. Based on this the CIA reached the
>conclusion that UFOs were ET in origin in late 1952 (as Chadwell
>and his deputy Ralph Clark both told me) but only until the AF
>sprung its trap at the Robertson Panel.

What was the motivation for this devious Air Force plot, Brad?
We now know firmly that the Air Force (very strong key elements
thereof) did believe UFOs were ET in origin. Are you suggesting
thye deliberately deceived the CIA in this regard out of
organizational jealousy?

>***As the AF planned***, the supposed "best UFO" cases blew up into
>IFO's at the Robertson Panel, which never got the set of best
>cases that Ruppelt kept in a special file collection. The CIA
>was humiliated and never suspected it was an AF trick. The CIA
>was thus manipulated by the AF into drawing the conclusion that
>UFOs must just be IFO's, nothing more, and ought to be
>vigorously debunked. But the UFO community does not want to read
>the released CIA documents and see this is the case - the CIA
>can only be the root of all UFO evil in the UFO community's
>party line view of UFO history.

Where is the slightest documentary evidence for this extreme
revisionist history?  Where is Ruppelt's secret file of best
cases? (Elsewhere you have criticized Ruppelt for allegedly
being devious and manipulating the truth.) Why would the AF want
UFOs debunked? Brad, you simply have to stop putting out this
sort of extreme viewpoint without providing reasonable
documentation. Your fabled book that always is out somewhere at
the end of the rainbow could be published tomorrow if you really
have evidence of what you claim. Until you do, I suggest that
your pro-CIA anti-Air Force stance is a house of cards. - Dick

[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com