UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 24

UFO "Leakiness"

From: Nicholas Redfern <nick_redfern.nul>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 10:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 10:33:30 -0400
Subject: UFO "Leakiness"


This, below, just in from David Clarke.

Note the fact that highly intriguing internal documentation from
the Ministry of Defence demonstrates that there was a reluctance
to provide the MoD's public UFO Desk with a copy of the
Defense Intelligence Staff's secret UFO study: Project Condign.
The reason for this is particularly interesting, as you will

Nick Redfern


Two months ago Norman Baker, Lib Dem MP for Lewes, tabled a
written question in Parliament on the Defence Intelligence Staff
report on UFOs "Project Condign."

He wanted to know how much public money was spent on producing
the report, along with the name of the author, his
qualifications, to whom the report was circulated and what
actions were taken on the recommendations.

The reply he received from Rt Hon Adam Ingram MP revealed that
the report cost an estimated =A350,000 and was produced by a
contractor employed by the DIS on a long term contract. The MOD
refused to name him, citing the Data Protection Act, but said
the report had been circulated within the DIS and to other
branches of the MoD and RAF.

Mr Ingram's reply did not say if a copy of the report - produced
by the intelligence services - had been sent to the Defence
Secretariat, or DAS - formerly Sec(AS), and often referred to as
'the UFO desk' - which the MoD maintains is the single and only
focus for UFO matters at Whitehall.

As a result Mr Baker has tabled a further Parliamentary Question
to be answered on 4 June, specifically asking if the Defence &
Secretariat received a copy of the UAP report, see:


Question 48 in the list.

Mr Ingram's reply will be of great interest. As I have already
demonstrated, see:


(Section 6: Was the UFO desk, Nick Pope's former post at Sec AS,
made aware of the existence and conclusions of the Condign

The Defence Secretariat were specifically excluded from the
distribution list of the intelligence report, despite the fact
that in 1995-96, when the study was commissioned, they were
cited by DI55 as "the main customer" for the report's
conclusions and recommendations. Why was that?

Internal DIS documents recently obtained by Joe McGonagle under
the FOIA provide an indication of the reasons why, by 2000, the
intelligence services deemed the completed report could not be
trusted with the "UFO desk."

In an email dated 17 December 1999 from DI55 to DIST an
intelligence officer says:

"No positive purpose would be served in sending the report to...
Sec AS [Nick Pope's former branch]...in view of the 'leakiness'
of Sec AS we would advocate only releasing the report to them on
request, in order to discourage further discussion."

It will be interesting to compare Mr Ingram's Parliamentary
reply with this quotation from a contemporary document. In the
meantime Mr Baker intends to pursue the question of the identity
and qualifications of the report's author directly with the
Defence Ministry. I will keep you updated on the results.

Dave Clarke

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous 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