In regards to Jim Oberg's startlingly
revealing (yet utterly ignored!) recent usenet posting:
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: OTHER gov't UFO secrets
From: jamesoberg@aol.com
Date: 26 Apr 1997 14:15:43 GMT
Open
letter to CSETI:
I applaud CSETI's efforts to strip away
the "government secrets prosecution" barrier to the disclosure
of people's stories about UFO experiences and I fully support the
call for a government declaration that all legal constraints against
disclosure be dissolved. I've always felt that claims of fear of such
prosecution as an excuse by people not to "go public" was
often merely a gimmick not to have to take responsibility for the
authenticity of such stories, since as far as I've been able to tell
-- and through OMNI's "Project Open Book" we searched
far and wide for examples -- nobody has ever been arrested or charged
-- much less convicted and sentenced -- for actually doing so.
But don't stop merely with legalizing
disclosure of all -- if any -- government secrets about "real
UFOs". I believe there is a far more valuable body of "secrets"
that will help understand the decades of UFO phenomena that the world
has experienced. This deals with government-related activities which
directly or indirectly led to public perceptions that UFOs might be
real when they weren't. Sometimes these actions were carefully orchestrated
in advance, sometimes they were localized impromptu ad hoc damage-
limitation tactics. But from my own experience, they seem to have
played a tremendous and widely unappreciated role in inciting and
enflaming public interests in UFOs while deflecting public attention
from real highly-classified government activities.
I'm referring to situations where government
representatives -- officials, military officers, any employees --
used "UFO" as a convenient camouflage for other official
classified activities (such as retrieval of crashed aircraft or nuclear
weapons or other objects), or used artificial "UFO stories"
(in oral, written, photographic, film, etc.) form as "tracers"
in studying the function of security safeguards and personnel psychological
responses, or used "UFO" as an excuse (either intended or
accidental) to cover-up improper, forbidden, or diplomatically delicate
activities (such as aviation incidents involving dangerous accidental
or deliberate close passes or intercepts of civilian airliners, or
overseas excursions of agents on intelligence missions where deflection
of local perceptions was useful, or to conceal from the country of
origin the possession of foreign military hardware), or played pranks
and jokes on intended or accidental targets, or any other activity
that the government -- or any part of it -- wanted to keep hidden,
knowing that having it thought of as "UFO-related" would
consign it to the never-never- land of myth and nuttiness, thus keeping
mainstream media attention to a minimum. And it's worked!!
Please include such "UFO secrets"
in your list of disclosure demands, and ask that any government personnel
involved in the use (or misuse and abuse) of such practices be immune
from any government prosecution for the actions which led them to
take such measures. Once such immunity is verifiably granted, I have
my own list of people who have privately talked to me over the years
and who were involved in government activities leading to a number
of well-known "UFO cases", which can be released and which
can help understand where and how much of today's UFO mythology originated.
This is a serious proposal deserving
of serious consideration, and promises immensely fruitful results.
Figuring Brother Jim for
the consummate team player, we marvelled amongst ourselves at this
unexpected midstream change of strategy and could not help but wonder
who birthed the Bright Idea to expose the delicate underbelly of The
Dark Lords in such a blatant fashion as this!
So, deciding to shake the tree a tad,
we stuffed a copy of Oberg's refreshingly candid letter into both
the mouth of The Eschaton (who immediately circulated it on the Hill)
and the beak of his Devious Overlord the Pelican then sat back,
amused, to watch the cauldron bubble a bit.
Eye of Newt and Tongue of Dan, etc.
Now in that our Fine Metaprogramming
Friend, CSETI's Dr. Steve, is currently embroiled in a Holy NWO B'hai
Jihad of Galactic Proportion, Brother Daniel was absolutely delighted
to encounter such a propitious cache-o-timely-intell, thinking to
toss the recent Oberg Missive on the Relatively Holy Fires which are
already beginning to brew in certain Secrecy Oversight Hearings out
D.C. way.
Alas, The Evil Government hath once
again prevailed for a subsequent call to Mr. Oberg revealed not the
Righteously Indignant and Noble Seeker of Truth we had hoped, but
rather an intimidated and downright terrified individual who had apparently
been pushed around a bit by The Bully which calls itself our
Deare Uncle Samuel. In fact, Mr. Oberg stated that he did not want
his family involved in any of this and that he was now abandoning
the field of UFOlogy altogether!
A most interesting turn of events, no?
So where does this leave us? The sp00ks
can still hide many of their heinous and insidious black-ops human
experimentation projeckts beneath the veil of the Modern Urban Myth
which we all lovingly refer to as Club UFOlogy whilst Brother James
will have trouble showing his face around these parts without some
elaborate form of retraction-flavoured sophistry. Though many of the
True Blue UFO Believers will no
doubt rejoice over this perceived "victory" as yet another
of their Hegelian counterparts bites the dust, we cannot but perceive
this as a depressing setback in terms of shedding much needed light
into some of the darker recesses of the taxpayer-funded eschatological
machine.
::: sigh :::
In any event, for those who psuspect
something far less extraterrestrial than "rectum-coring reticulan
reptoids" from outer space, we have included some related materials
which you will no doubt find of great interest:
- A recently declassified (FOIA) and
highly relevant CIA document.
- A copy of the infamous Pentacle Memorandum
(with poignant commentary by our Beloved Jacques Vallee)
- Oberg's bio (as of 94-08-17)
[dated 1952]
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington 25, D.C.
Office of the Director
Memorandum to: Director, Psychological
Strategy Board
Subject: Flying Saucers
I am today transmitting to the National Security Council a
proposal (TAB A) in which it is concluded that the problems connected
with unidentified flying objects appear to have implications for psychological
warfare as well as for intelligence and operations.
The background for this view is presented
in some detail in TAB B.
I suggest that we discuss as an early
board meeting the possible offensive or defensive utilization
of these phenomena for psychological warfare purposes.
Walter B. Smith
Director
Enclosure
[Note: for additional information
regarding this controversial document, contact Technology 1999, 3739
8th Ave, Suite One, San Diego, CA 92103-4327, (888) 223-1999 -B:.B:.]
THE PENTACLE MEMORANDUM
A controversial memorandum from 1953
may shed new light on the UFO phenomenon.
January 9, 1953
SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION
G-1579-4
cc: B.D. Thomas
H.C. Cross / A.D. Westerman
L.R. Jackson
W.T. Reid
P.J. Rieppal
V.W. Ellsey / R.J. Lund
Files
Extra [handwritten]
Mr. Miles E. Coll
Box 9575
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio
Attention Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt
Dear Mr. Coll:
This letter concerns a preliminary recommendation
to ATIC on future methods of handling the problem of unidentified
aerial objects. This recommendation is based on our experience to
date in analyzing several thousands of reports on this subject. We
regard the recommendation as preliminary because our analysis is not
yet complete, and we are not able to document it where we feel it
should be supported by facts from the analysis.
We are making this recommendation prematurely
because of a CIA-sponsored meeting of a scientific panel, meeting
in Washington, D.C., January 14, 15, and 16, 1953, to consider the
problem of "flying saucers". The CIA-sponsored meeting is
being hold subsequent to a meeting of CIA, ATIC, and our representatives
held at ATIC on December 12, 1952. At the December 12 meeting our
representatives strongly recommended that a scientific panel not be
set up until the results of our analysis of the sighting- reports
collected by ATIC were available. Since a meeting of the panel is
now definitely scheduled we feel that agreement between Project Stork
and ATIC should be reached as to what can and what cannot be discussed
at the meeting in Washington on January 14-16 concerning our preliminary
recommendation to ATIC.
Experience to date on our study of unidentified
flying objects shows that there is a distinct lack of reliable data
with which to work. Even the best-documented reports are frequently
lacking in critical information that makes it impossible to arrive
at a possible identification, i.e. even in a well-documented report
there is always an element of doubt about the data, either because
the observer had no means of getting the required data, or was not
prepared to utilize the means at his disposal. Therefore, we recommend
that a controlled experiment be set up by which reliable physical
data can be obtained. A tentative preliminary plan by which the experiment
could be designed and carried out is discussed in the following paragraphs.
Based on our experience so far, it is
expected that certain conclusions will be reached as a result of our
analysis which will make obvious the need for an effort to obtain
reliable data from competent observers using the [...unreadable...]
necessary equipment. Until more reliable data are available, no positive
answers to the problem will be possible.
We expect that our analysis will show
that certain areas in the United States have had an abnormally high
number of reported incidents of unidentified flying objects. Assuming
that, from our analysis, several definite areas productive of reports
can be selected, we recommend that one or two of theses areas be set
up as experimental areas. This area, or areas, should have observation
posts with complete visual skywatch, with radar and photographic coverage,
plus all other instruments necessary or helpful in obtaining positive
and reliable data on everything in the air over the area. A very complete
record of the weather should also be kept during the time of the experiment.
Coverage should be so complete that any object in the air could be
tracked, and information as to its altitude, velocity, size, shape,
color, time of day, etc. could be recorded. All balloon releases or
known balloon paths, aircraft flights, and flights of rockets in the
test area should be known to those in charge of the experiment. Many
different types of aerial activity should be secretly and purposefully
scheduled within the area.
We recognize that this proposed experiment
would amount to a large- scale military maneuver, or operation, and
that it would require extensive preparation and fine coordination,
plus maximum security. Although it would be a major operation, and
expensive, there are many extra benefits to be derived besides the
data on unidentified aerial objects.
The question of just what would be accomplished
by the proposed experiment occurs. Just how could the problem of these
unidentified objects be solved? From this test area, during the time
of the experiment, it can be assumed that there would be a steady
flow of reports from ordinary civilian observers, in addition to those
by military or other official observers. It should be possible by
such a controlled experiment to prove the identity of all objects
reported, or to determine positively that there were objects present
of unknown identity. Any hoaxes under a set-up such as this could
almost certainly be exposed, perhaps not publicly, but at least to
the military.
In addition, by having resulting data
from the controlled experiment, reports for the last five years could
be re-evaluated, in the light of similar but positive information.
This should make possible reasonably certain conclusions concerning
the importance of the problem of "flying saucers".
Results of an experiment such as described
could assist the Air Force to determine how much attention to pay
to future situations when, as in the past summer, there were thousands
of sightings reported. In the future, then, the Air Force should be
able to make positive statements, reassuring to the public, and to
the effect that everything is well under control.
Very truly yours,
[unsigned]
H.C. Cross
[following is a related response
from Jacques Vallee]
27 April 1993
Barry Greenwood
JUST CAUSE
Dear Barry:
Thank you for sending me your thoughtful
commentary about the Pentacle document. I do agree with you on one
point: the significance of the memo comes, in part, from what it does
not say. In particular, it makes no reference to any recovered UFO
hardware, at Roswell or elsewhere, or to alien bodies. The greater
significance of what it does say will slowly emerge in coming years
as the overall implications come to light. Let me draw your attention
to three specific points.
1.
Project Twinkle and other observational efforts by the military,
which you mention in an effort to show that Pentacle was only dusting
off an old idea, were purely passive projects. In sharp contrast
the Pentacle proposal goes far beyond anything mentioned before.
It daringly states that "many different types of aerial activity
should be SECRETLY AND PURPOSEFULLY SCHEDULED WITHIN THE AREA (my
emphasis)." It is difficult to be more clear. We are not talking
simply about setting up observing stations and cameras. We are talking
about large-scale, covert simulation of UFO waves under military
control.
2.
The greatest implication, which is perhaps not obvious on first
reading but which amounts to a scandal of major proportion in the
eyes of any scientist, has to do with the outright manipulation
of the Robertson panel. Here is a special meeting of the
five most eminent scientists in the land, assembled by the government
to discuss a matter of national security. Not only are they not
made aware of all the data, but another group has already decided
"what can and cannot be discussed (Pentacle's own words!)" when
they meet. Dr. Hynek categorically stated to me that the
panel was not briefed about the Pentacle proposals.
3.
Revelation of this document may seem irrelevant to Just Cause, but
its explosive nature wasn't lost on Battelle. As I noted in Forbidden
Science, and as Fred Beckman vividly recalls to this day, the Project
Stork team reacted with fury when Hynek went back to Battelle
in 1967, demanding to know the truth. The man I have called Pentacle
snatched his notes away and told him in no uncertain terms that
the contents of the memo were not to be discussed, under any circumstances.
[In Forbidden Science, Vallee
notes in June of 1967 "What these people were recommending was
nothing less than a carefully calibrated and monitored simulation
of an entire UFO wave" and asks "For whom did 'Pentacle'
work? Did the proposed experiment take place? Who were these people
who calmly sat around the table with the CIA and the Air Force and
who, many years before us, understood the need to acquire second-generation
data?" And of the insights of his friend Dr. Hynek, he states
"Hynek had once assured me that if it ever turned out that a
secret study had been conducted, the American public would raise an
unbelievable stink against the military and intelligence communities.
It would be an outrage, he said, an insult to the whole country, not
to mention a violation of the most cherished principles of American
democracy." (p. 285) Elsewhere, regarding the Pentacle document
he remarks "It is hard to excuse the betrayal of science that
took place when the intelligence community decided to bar the Robertson
Panel from direct access to the knowledge Pentacle and his group had
obtained." while of Hynek, he laments "Hynek was a quiet
man, who disliked confrontation and scandal, feared authority and
was in awe of secrecy. He once told me plainly that 'he would not
look under the bed even if he knew for certain that something was
hidden there.'" (pp. 425-426) -B:.B:.]
I find it odd that a group that claims
to be interested in the historical study of our field, as Just Cause
does, should fail to see the significance of the Pentacle Memo, which
is an authentic document, when so much time, money and ink have been
devoted over the last several years to an in-depth analysis of the
MJ-12 papers, which were faked. Perhaps the Pentacle memo only proves
that scientific studies of UFOs (and even their classified components)
have been manipulated since the fifties. But it also suggests several
avenues of research which are vital to the future of this field: why
were Pentacle's proposals kept from the panel? Were his plans for
a secret simulation of UFO waves implemented? If so, when, where and
how? What was discovered as a result? Are these simulations still
going on? I invite your group to turn its investigative resources
and its analytical talent to this important task.
In reading Forbidden Science, you should
recognize that the book is a Diary, no, an analytical report or a
memoir. Therefore many important inferences, many relevant details,
can only be found by reading between the lines. Your preliminary analysis
of the Pentacle memo is not unfair, but it is somewhat simplistic,
and it takes it out of context. I invite you to go back for a second,
closer reading.
/s/ Jacques Vallee
cc: Fred Beckman
Excerpt from:
Encounter Chronicles, Journal of Scientific
Intelligence
Issue #16, Vol. 4, No. 4, July-August 1996
Dr. Rod Lewis, Editor/Publisher
10878 Westheimer #293, Houston, TX 77042
forbsci@aol.com
(713) 558-5342 (BBS)
(713) 558-1630 (Voicemail)
Subj: Re: "THE" James Oberg?
Date: 94-08-17 07:20:07 EDT
From: JamesOberg
To: Density 4
Professional Profile James E. Oberg
Address: Rt 2 Box 350, Dickinson, TX 77539
FAX or phone: 713-337-2838
Born Nov. 7, 1944, NYC, NY. Married 1969, two sons (b. 1977, 1984).
SSN xxx-xx-xxxx
US Passport # Z6xx46x2, expires 3/3/02, issued in Marseilles, France
on March 3, 1992
Education: B.A.-- mathematics (summa
cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa), Ohio Wesleyan University, 1966, departmental
honors in math (orbital rendezvous), honors in Russian
M.S. (plus additional Ph.D. coursework), Applied Mathematics (Astrodynamics),
Northwestern University, 1969
M.S. Computing Sciences (compiler design), University of New Mexico,
1972. USAF Squadron Officer School // Command and Staff College //
DoD Computer Institute faculty
Profession: Manned Spaceflight Operations Specialist (Past, Present,
and Future)
Avocation: Expert in Russian Space Technology, Operations, History,
and Policy
Sample Specialties:
Space Station Habitability // Role of Man-in-Space // Technology Transfer
Vulnerabilities/Opportunities
Space Hardware and Facilities Assessment // Accurate Policy Options
Analysis Problems of high-tech complex systems control center operations
and decision-making International Cooperation & Competition //
"Lessons Learned" Overviews Russian military/civil aerospace
operations, accidents, historical controversies Divergent, Innovative
Alternative Approaches to Complex Technical Problems Technological
Defenses Against Biosphere Threats ("Planetary Engineering")
Recent consultees on Soviet/Russian
spaceflight include:
NASA -- (Johnson Space Center, NASA Headquarters, Marshall Spaceflight
Center and JPL)
Rockwell Space Operations Company // National Air and Space Museum
Fairchild Space Company (Germantown, MD) // TRW Corporation (Redondo
Beach)
Hamilton Standard // McDonnell Douglas Space Station Office (Washington,
DC)
Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) // Government Accounting Office
(GAO)
National Science Foundation // U.S. Army Engineering Center (Fort
Leonard Wood, MO)
Association of Space Explorers // United States Information Agency
// Voice of America
United Nations Outer Space Affairs Division // British Interplanetary
Society // RAND Corporation
International Space Hall of Fame (Alamogordo) // Space Commerce Corporation
(Houston)
Sotheby's of New York // George Marshall Institute (Washington,DC)
// Boston Museum of Science
Teledyne Brown Engineering (Colorado Springs) // U.S. Library of Congress
Federal Research Division
Science Applications International Corporation (New York City) //
AT&T Bell Labs (Whippany, NJ)
CBS News (including 60 Minutes, CBS Evening News, Morning News)
ABC News (including Evening News, Nightline, Good Morning America)
NBC News (including Evening News) // CNN News (including News, Crossfire)
Radio Free Europe // Radio Liberty // BBC // CBC // NPR "As It
Happens"
PBS NOVA Russian space miniseries "The Russian Right Stuff"
(WGBH)
Most major U.S. newspapers, newsmagazines, wire services, and radio
networks
Publications: Author of more than 400 popular magazine articles on
spaceflight around the world, and of eight books including Red Star
in Orbit (Random House), Pioneering Space (McGraw-Hill), Mission to
Mars (New American Library), and, most recently, Uncovering Soviet
Disasters (Random House).
Books in preparation on "Space
Age Folklore", "Russian Secrets", "Future of the
Russian Space Program", and "Climate Engineering on Earth".
Also, leading speaker and commentator on Russian space affairs.
Languages: Eloquent English, good Russian
and French, medium German, Latin.
Professional Honors: American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, National Space Society, British Interplanetary
Society, Clear Lake Council of Technical Societies, Russian Academy
of Cosmonautics Nov 12, 1993
Obscuris Vera
Involvens;
- Blue Resonant
Human, Ph.D., etc.
"No, no, no -- not you, m'lord, the other m'lord, m'lord."
