Is the CIA Stonewalling?

.....
The Government and UFOs
''Furthet scientific investigation of
UFOs is unwarranted."
'-Ai) Force, 1980
Perhaps most disturbing is the very
fact that after thirty-two years, a small
but significant percentage of UFOs
still remains unidentified. While the
government has been concerned with
the psychological danger the UFO
phenomenon poses, it has been un-
willing to consider the prospect that
some UFOs pose an actual physical
threat. Fearful of generating undue
concern, the government has
deliberately chosen to debunk UFO
reports and has misinformed the
public as to the true importance of the
phenomenon.
Unconventional aerial objects that
boast unlimited and unrestricted
access to our most sensitive nuclear
installations-and which can render
inoperable the instrumentation, com-
munication/weapon systems of
American-made jets, or which can
shut down and restart at will
sophisticated hydraulic equipment-
do warrant further scientific study.
Awareness of an advanced technology
and potential threat is not an
1 unreasonable pursuit. As the National
l Security Agencr indicates, it could be
a matter ot survival.
T ~ough adruitted~y the govern-
ment has '"Studied UFO
reports, apparently no. government
body has dwelt on those official
government reports that indicate cer-
tain UFOs pose a threat to national
security. Is there any doubt that it is
these reports which deserve further
scientific investigation?
The now-defunct USAF twenty-year
"Project Blue Book" UFO study never
had a chance to receive the "outstand-
ing report" from Iran. An Air Force
document states: "Reports of UFOs
which could affect nati~nal security
are made _in accordance with JAN AP
146* or Air Force Manual 55-11, and
are not part of the Blue Book system."
The Air Force's UFO investigation was
"joint Army-Navy-Air Force Publication 146 is
published by the Military Communications Board
of the DOD joint Chiefs of Staff. It provided U.S.·
Canadian ·communications Instructions for
Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings {CIRVIS)
from Airborne and Waterborne Sources.· Section
III {Security), paragraph 208, calls for stiffpenalties
for divulging information about such sightings once
reported. - Ed.
criticized as long ago as 1952 by the
CIA. The CIA complained that the Air
Force's case·by-case investigations
and explanations were insufficient to
determine the exact nature of the
phenomenon.'
Similarly, the Air Force-sponsored
"Condon Committee" study by the
University of Colorado in 1968 never
earnestly intended to investigate the
physical reality of the phenomenon.
Indeed, an early memorandum by one
of Dr. Edward U. Condon's staff in-
dicates otherwise: "The trick would
be, I think to describe the project so
that to the public, it would appear a
totally objective study ... one way to
do this would be to stress investiga-
tion, not of the physical phenomenon,
but rather of the people who are doing
the observing ..."7
Conclusion
In June 1978, a French government
UFO study group (GEPAN) concluded
that "everything taken into considera·
tion, a material phenomenon seems to
be behind the totality of the
phenomenon - a flying machine
whose modes of sustenance: and pro-
May-June 1981 27
pulsion are beyond our knowledge:
If the UFO phenomenon is indeed
beyond the grasp of our understand-
ing - technologically speaking- all the
more reason to strive towards learning
more about it. For although the United
States mav i nore the SHtmhcance of
t e Phenomenon, it ts ardlv
reasonable to supoose that the rest of
the world will do so. .
And there are other considerations
besides national security in following
up the UFO enigma. As a report from
the National Securitv A2encv in 1968
put It,
"Perhaps the UFO question ~
might even make man undertake •
studies which could enable him
to construct a society which is 2
most conducive to developing a -
completely human being,
healthy in all aspects of mind and ?
body-and, most importantly, ,
able to recognize and adapt to
real environmental situations."
In isolating ourselves from the UFO
phenomenon we may risk missing·
what could be the most important
adventure man has yet embarked
up~ 0
Is the CIA Stonewalling?
by RICHARD HALL
BASED ON the 892 pages of UFO-
related documents released to lawyer
Peter Gersten, it is clear that the CIA's
professed non-interest in UFOs is un- ·
true. There is internal evidence of non-
continuity within the CIA, and even of
one group or analyst being unaware of
other files or previous work. This is
not surprising considering the highly
compartmentalized nature of the
agency. But periodic studies or
reviews were ordered and UFO
reports, foreign and domestic, were
routinely monitored over long periods
of time.
The statement is sometimes made
that the CIA has had no •formal" study
of UFOs other than the 1953 Robert·
son Panel, but these documents show
that the agency kept (and no doubt
keeps) plenty of "channels" open to
gather information, including an
acknowledged channel into the
RICHARD HALL was former Assistant. Director
of NICAP, the leading UFO organization during
the 1950s and 1960s. He is the Editor of
MUFON Journal and a Frontiers of Science
advisor.0
1966-68 University of Colorado UFO
project. The documents also clearly in-
dicate that in 1952 the CIA was·
prepared to mount a major scientific
study of UFOs based on the extraor-
dinary radar-visual sightings that
year, but that the debunking conclu-
siox:i of the Robertson Panel cut short
that effort.
In May 1953, following the Robert-
. son Panel report, •p&E Division
assumed responsibility for the OSI
project on unidentified flying objects.•
(December 17, 1953 memo to Assis-
tant Director, Scientific Intelligence)
A year later, the Chief of P&E (Physics
and Electronics) said he would "main-
tain the OSI central file on such ob-
jects,• which he did until August 1955,
according to an August 8, 1955 memo
to the Assistant Director of Scientific
Intelligence.
AFTER THAT, responsibility was
assigned to the Applied Science Divi-
sion, ~here W.E. Lexow, Division
Chief, stated in a February -1956
memo: •A chronological file of all OSI
correspondence and action faken in