Documents / Official release
This Clinton Presidential Library folder of NSC cables, filed under "Flying Saucer or UFO" and covering January to September 1997, holds several cables plus a withdrawal sheet listing three redacted items. A Tel Aviv embassy media report notes an Israeli cartoon about a January 5 UFO alert. An FBIS translation reports that a Colombian helicopter landed in Rubio, Venezuela, prompting UFO speculation. A DoD briefing transcript quotes Kenneth Bacon saying a CIA study found no evidence of UFOs, and an FBIS summary covers Cuban radio claims about the 1947 New Mexico crash.
“The Pentagon”18 pages
Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.
WHAT'S THE LEGAL STATUS OF THIS MARINE WHO IS ACCUSED OF SHOOTING A U.S. CITIZEN WHILE ON BORDER PATROL? AND YOU HAVE A CIVILIAN AUTHORITY INVESTIGATING AND CHARGING, AND ARE THE MARINES GOING TO HAVE A SEPARATE LITIGATION? WHAT'S THE STATE OF PLAY ON THAT? A: I'M TEMPTED TO INVOKE THE WARREN CHRISTOPHER RULE THAT IN A MULTI-PART QUESTION, I GET TO ANSWER THE QUESTION I CHOOSE. [LAUGHTER] BUT I WON'T BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL SERIOUS QUESTIONS. TODAY THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT HAS ABOUT 242 PEOPLE ON THE BORDER ASSISTING WITH OBSERVATION AND SURVEILLANCE OF BORDER ACTIVITIES. THIS IS PART OF THE SUPPORT OF COUNTER-DRUG EFFORTS, NOT MOUNTED BY THIS AGENCY, BUT MOUNTED BY GENERAL MCCAFFREY'S AGENCY. WE PROVIDE TROOPS PURELY IN A SUPPORT CAPACITY, BECAUSE, AS YOU KNOW, THE MILITARY IS PROSCRIBED FROM PARTICIPATING IN DOMESTIC LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES UNDER AN 1878 LAW, THE POSSE COMITATUS LAW. SO WE PROVIDE SUPPORT IN TERMS OF EXTRA EYES AND ## PAGE 06 RUEKJCS3094 UNCLAS EARS, SOME SURVEILLANCE, MAYBE SOME INTELLIGENCE FROM TIME TO TIME, BUT IT'S ALL IN A SUPPORT CAPACITY. GENERAL MCCAFFREY HAS MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT HE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE ALL OF THE BORDER PATROL OPERATION DONE BY BORDER PATROL AGENTS AND NOT HAVE THE MILITARY INVOLVED AT ALL. AND THE MILITARY WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT A DECISION LIKE THAT, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE APPOINTING MANY MORE BORDER PATROL AGENTS THAN WE HAVE TODAY. SO WE CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT IN AN AS-NEEDED BASIS. I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED ANYWHERE NEAR AN ADDITIONAL 10,000 SOLDIERS TO ASSIST IN THE SUPPORT OF THE BORDER PATROL OPERATIONS RIGHT NOW. AND THERE HAS BEEN-- SO ANSWERING YOUR FIRST QUESTION, THAT'S IT. I'M AFRAID I'VE FORGOTTEN MOST OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT - Q: THE OTHER ONE WAS, WHAT'S THE STATE OF PLAY, LEGALLY, WHERE YOU HAVE CIVILIAN AUTHORITIES IN TEXAS CHARGING A MARINE WITH SHOOTING A CITIZEN WHILE ON BORDER PATROL, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE MARINES, WHO PRESUMABLY HAVE THEIR OWN LEGAL ACTION. WILL THE DEPARTMENT LET THE CIVILIAN AUTHORITIES QUESTION THE MARINE OR WILL THEY INSIST ON A SEPARATE LEGAL ACTION BY THE CORPS? UNCLAS SECTION 02 OF 03 A: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THE MARINES HAVE COOPERATED FULLY WITH DOMESTIC LAW AND WITH CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN THE COURSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION, AND THEY CONTINUE TO COOPERATE FULLY. THEY HAVE MADE STATEMENTS, THEY HAVE PROVIDED ALL THE INFORMATION THEY'VE BEEN REQUESTED TO PROVIDE. Q: WHILE YOU'RE ON THAT, DOES THAT INCLUDE LETTING THEM QUESTION THIS ACCUSED PERSON? A: SORRY? Q: THERE WAS A COMPLAINT THAT THE CIVILIAN AUTHORITIES WEREN'T ALLOWED TO QUESTION THE ACCUSED MARINE. A: I KNOW THE ACCUSED MARINE HAS PROVIDED A STATEMENT OF WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. Q: BUT I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF I CAN TAKE IT FROM YOUR STATEMENT THAT, IF REQUESTED, THE MARINES WILL LET HIM BE QUESTIONED BY CIVILIAN AUTHORITIES.
Official release, from the nara collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. The text was read from the page images by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word. 48 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.