The UFO Conspiracy - Jenny Randles
The UFO Conspiracy - Jenny Randles
The UFO Conspiracy - Jenny Randles
UFO
CONSPIRACY
The First Forty Years
JENNY RANDLES
BARNES
&. NOBLE
B 0 0 K S
N W Y O k
Copyright 1987 by Jenny Randles
All rights reserved.
This edition published by Barnes & Noble, Inc.,
by arrangement with Cassell PLC.
1993 Barnes & Noble Books
ISBN 1-56619-195-5
Printed and bound in the United States of America
M9 8 765432
Author's Note 7
Introduction 8
CONTENTS
PART ONE: THE UFO INVASION
1 The UFOs Arrive - June 1947 13
2 Did We Catch One! - July 1947 18
3 Operation Intercept 1948 23
4 A Breach In Our Defences - 1950 30
5 Invasion Washington DC - 1952 35
6 An American Craziness? - 1953 41
7 The Aliens Arrive - 1954 46
8 A Warning From Space? - 1957 54
9 Alien Contact - 1961 60
10 The End Of An Era - 1967 65
11 Ofcial UFOs - 1976 72
12 The Education Programme - 1980 76
PART TWO: THE UFO WORLDWIDE
Introduction 87
13 United Kingdom - 1948 92
14 Australia - 1957 94
15 South America - 1967 97
16 South Africa - 1972 100
17 USA - 1973 102
18 Spain - 1976 106
19 New Zealand - 1978 110
20 USSR - 1985 115
PART THREE: THE UFO PROOF
Introduction 121
21 Air Encounters 123
22 Space Encounters 131
23 When The Force Is With You - UFO Efects 136
24 Witnesses Who Glow In The Dark - UFO Radiation 142
25 Supernatural Causes - UFO Fatalities 150
26 UFOs On Film 157
PART FOUR: THE UFO COVER-UP
Int roduction 169
27 Australia - Land Of Freedom? 17 I
28 Europe - Nations At War? 176
29 France - An Open Secret 180
30 USSR - A Secret Opening? 185
31 United Kingdom - No Defence Signifcance? 189
32 USA - Freedom Of Information 200
Conclusions 204
List of References 208
Useful Addresses 213
Apendix: Relevant Documents 215
Index 219
AUTHOR'S NOTE
On 24 June 1947 an American pilot saw a group of strange objects in
the sky. He described them as moving ' like saucers skipping across water' .
From this an anonymous journalist invented the term 'fying saucer', later
adapted by Captain Ed Ruppelt, the USAF intelligence ofcer responsible
for such matters, to the more familiar UFO (Unidentifed Flying Object).
Four decades have elapsed since such events. In that time the UFO
mystery has gone through many phases - but now we have all the facts,
accumulations of evidence and major revelations through the ofcial study
projects operated by the world's leading nations. It is time to set these
things before you and assess the situation forty years on.
Let us keep i n mind that the UFO phenomenon may represent an een greate reality.
It is our choice to treat it as a threat or an opportunity for human knowle.
(Part of the address given to the United Nations on 27 November 1978 by Dr Jacques
Vallee, now the world's principal UFO scientist.)
This book is dedicated to Dr J. Allen Hynek, who left the earth with
Halley's Comet during 1986. We shall continue the fght for truth in his
honour.
7
INTRODUCTION
Both 'UFO' and ' Conspiracy' are emotive words. Put them together in
a single phrase, as I have done, and you produce what some will call sen
sationalism. But I am not about to ofer cheap thrills as a substitute for
truth. I do mean all that I write and believe that what I say can be simply
demonstrated. This book is a catalogue of facts, not of dreams.
It is popular, especially in the USA, to say that a 'cover-up' of UFO
reality by ofcial sources is responsible for all the problems that beset
this subject. That is a rather naive statement. Many of the difculties
stem from the basic inadequacies of amateur investigators, who have turned
to the sky in search of a fairy tale rather than the truth. However, the
suggestion that an attitude of disinformation prevails on some vast scale
- so vast it is ofen called 'the Cosmic Watergate' - is surprisingly
justifed if you look deep enough.
This recognition provokes countless questions. Wy should the exstence
of this phenomenon be hidden? After all, UFOs are seen by hundreds
of thousands of people and can not very easily be denied. How could any
signifcant breakthroughs be withheld from public gaze for more than
a very short while? Surely somebody would want t o blow wide open the
story of the century?
I have no intention of running away from such matters. However, bfore
we begin there are a few overriding points to consider.
UFOs exist. The evidence that will confront you in the pages that follow
makes that conclusion inescapable if you accept that science is about lear
ning new things. We know more in 1987 than we did in 1937. There will
be wonders in 2037 we have not the slightest inkling of right now. Anyone
who says UFOs are impossible, because scientists have not 'discovered'
them, has no understanding of what scientists do.
UFOs have also been investigated by every major government on earth,
and are stil being studied at an ofcial level in China, France, Spain,
the USSR, the USA, and the United Kingdom - to name but six leading
nations. If UFOs were 'bunk', or of no great importance, do you really
think every leading power and super power would make the same crass
error and submit to this absurdity?
8
Yet, and here lies the rub, these nations (except one or two who are
refreshingly open) play a dangerous game of double bluf. Their records
and their actions speak for themselves. I have not conjured up some im
aginative scenario, but have based this story on ofcial documents and
statements by people from the heart of the matter. These demonstrate
a total concern about the UFO mystery. However, in strange contradic
tion of this, the public statements of these people mislead and sometimes
lie. They downplay importance, denounce witnesses, refte investigations,
and cast around a smokescreen of apathy that would be extremely worry
ing - if we could think for more than a moment that it was not a charade.
To disregard the awesom, e facts staring blankly at us all would be a
demonstration of ineptitude and incompetence so enormous that none of
us could sleep soundly in our beds . For we trust our very lives to these
people, who now hold in their hands many ways to destroy our planet
- not the least of which is an electronic arsenal of deadly weapons.
It has to be inconceivable that inexplicable objects dancing across our
skies would get the categorical brush-of after four decades of study. They
do not. These ofcial investigations continue; which, any application of
logic will tell you, means we have made some discoveries of apparent im
portance. No government in these economy-conscious days throws money
down the drain afer a non-existent phenomenon.
That said, ask yourself one question. Why are you being told that the
phenomenon is non-existent?
If the major powers consort to deny something they are all taking very
seriously, we are left to speculate. Of course, we might be wrong in such
speculation, but it seems appropriate to assume that they have good reasons
for the perpetuation of the myth of UFO nonsense. Reasons that may
also be potentially disturbing.
Put these facts together in a bowl and stir. Whatever combination of
the truth emerges is up to your own credibility threshold. I am not about
to try to force any option onto you. I contend very simply that one thing
is clear: the public is being deceived on a colossal scale. Ordinary citizens
are being labelled ' fools' for honestly describing what they saw. The media
is being manipulated by force-fed information that directs it towards re
quired goals. Science is being hoodwinked by the powers-that-be, who
may well want to preserve the monopoly they hold for research within
the secret services.
I submit that this does meet the requirements to be called a conspiracy.
Jenny Randles
9
Part One:
THE
LL
INVASION
1 THE UFOs ARRIVE -JUNE 1947
The magnifcent peaks of the Cascade Mountains glistened i n the
sunshine. Through the thin air the snow-capped sMit of Mount Rainier
rose to a height of 4392 m ( 1 4,400 f). Further in the distance stood the
brooding volcano of Mount St Helens, dormant and forgotten but awaiting
its moment of destiny. In 1 980 it would blister with alarming speed as
steam and lava built within. Then it would explode into one, fnal,
cataclysmic act of devastation.
Kenneth Arnold, 32, from Boise, Idaho, had more on his mind than the
breathtaking scenery. It was Tuesday, 24 June 1 947 - an ordinary,
summer's day. At least it should have been. In fact, it was a date that
changed history.
Arnold, like many post-war Americans, enj oyed a small degree of
afuence. This allowed him to fy his own light aircraf around the fve
states that formed his domain. As a reasonably successfl businessman the
new Callair model gave him freedom to roam the nonh-western territories
and land in rough felds and pastures.
That day he had left Chehalis in Washington State to head south-east on
the long voyage home. He was due to stop at Yakima en route, but frst he
was taking an hour-long detour to search for a missing aircraf. It was a US
Marine Curtiss C-46 Commando transport plane that had gone down
somewhere in the mountains. As a search and rescue fyer and deputy
federal marshal it was his duty to keep a lookout for signs of the accident.
He was always quite willing to go out of his way to help fellow aeronauts
who might be in trouble.
Besides, this was such a beautiful day to be at one with the elements.
Sadly, Kenneth Arnold never found that missing craf, but he did fnd
the greatest puzzle of the twentieth century.
It was approaching 3 pm as the pilot cruised through the crystal-clear
skies at just over 2800 m (9000 ft). Suddenly, a bright fash glinted on his
canopy. The strong sunlight was refecting of something far in the
distance, which was heading very rapidly south. He guessed that it had to
be at least 30 km ( 1 8l2 miles) away.
Concentrating now on the thing in the sky, it was obvious that this was
13
not one single object but a line of fat.ened, crescent-shaped discs. There
seemed to be nine of them, in an echelon formation, not unlike that of
a fock of fying geese. They were linked almost in a magical fashion, yet
ducked and bobbed and then rose as they moved. It was this sudden
dipping which made them catch the sun and fash very brightly.
Later, Arnold said of these objects that 'they were fat like a pie-can,
and so shiny that they refected the sun's rays like a mirror' . He was
naturally very surprised. In an interview with the famous American radio
journalist, Ed Murrow, on 7 April 1 950, Arnold added, ' I was baled
by the fact that they did not have any tails . . . I j udged their wing-span
to be at least 1 00 ft (30 m) across. Their sighting did not particularly
disturb me at the time, except that I had never seen planes of that type. '
I t was certainly a mystery t o this experienced pilot. He told Murrow,
'I never could understand why the world got so upset about 9 discs, as
these things didn't seem to be a menace. I believed that they had something
to do with our Army and Air Force. ' Even so, t hey had no tails, and no
wings. They were totally unlike anything he had ever witnessed before.
Using his skills at navigation he timed their fight against two peaks,
whose distance apart he could later measure. Gauging the speed from his
cockpit clock, he worked out something utterly incredible. They were
moving well in excess of 1 600 km ( 1 000 miles) per hour. I n 1 947 that
outdid everything a man-made plane could achieve. He began to wonder
not only if these were secret weapons, but also if they were of this earth.
When he landed at Yakima he told some friends about what had
happened. Later he few on to Pendleton, a small airfeld just over the
border into Oregon. Upon arrival he was greeted by a posse of journalists
eager to learn more. Arnold had no idea of the monster he had just
unleashed onto the world.
Of course, free publicity would not harm his business potential. Selling
fre-fghting equipment was a lucrative feld and a few cynics did question
his motives. Indeed it did seem curious that other pilots from Boise began
to see UFOs too - and Arnold himself claimed other sightings.
Nevertheless he insisted that his observations over Mount Rainier were
not a stunt and he retained his passionate interest in the subj ect until
his death in 1 984. It seems highly unlikely that such lasting concern would
result from a fgment of his imagination.
Quite why the story spread as it did nobody fully understands. Perhaps
the world needed an antidote afer the horrors of war. Arnold did tell
his adventure in graphic detail and used words that were tailor-made for
posterity. In fact there was a minor misunderstanding that created the
name by which we now know the phenomenon. He had explained to
newsmen that the objects he saw had skipped through the atmosphere
in the same way as you might cast a saucer across a pool of calm water and
14
make it bunce as many times as you can. He had not claimed that the craf
were saucer-shaped, but the name 'fying saucers' was immediately
invented. It was a priceless tag-line for this wonderfl tale. The media used
it well and encouraged other observers to come forward.
A great new mystery was before the world. Most people said it would not
last the summer and like all nine-day wonders would quickly disappear; but
most people were very wrong.
The UFOs had arrived, and forty years later they seem determined to
stay.
This flying saucer situation is not al imaginar or seeing too much in some natural
phenomenon. Something is realy fying around.
(Conclusion to a July 194 7 FBIArmy intelligence study repn, basd on a detailed analysis
of the Arold case, and ffeen other UFO encounters repned during the fi rst month of the
'fying saucer' mystery. Declassifed in 1976 by the American 'Freedom oflnformation'
Act.)
Oddly enough the Kenneth Arnold sighting was not the frst. Today we
recognise that a growing ' wave' of reports began that same month in the
USA, although very few were made public. Even the intelligence analysis
just quoted carries the Mount Rainier case as number four in its list. The
frst seems to have been at ffteen minutes afer noon on 19 May 194 7 when
three railway employees at Manitou Springs in Colorado observed some
small silvery objects through binoculars.
However, there can be no denying that the Washington State encounter
brought the mystery to life. It made everybody talk about these aerial
visions. What were they? Where did they come from? Were they American
or Russian? If neither, could they be visitors from another world? Within
a few weeks almost everyone knew what a ' fying saucer' was, and many
were out looking for them. A deluge of cases fooded into the newspapers
and military bases. The pressure on the authorities to do something about
the matter became irresistible.
Nobody seemed very keen to shoulder the responsibility. If these things
were secret weapons, the Americans knew that they could not be 'friendly' .
They had to be either Soviet or alien. For the Communist bloc to test such
powerfl craft in such a brazen way over enemy territory was a thought too
awful to contemplate, but it had to be considered. This explains why the
FBI (to check out witnesses for communist sympathies) and the Army-Air
Force (to study the fight charactristics of these 'weapons') both had to get
in on the act very quickly.
It also explains why there was almost paranoid secrecy.
Of course, from the point ofview ofthe government, it might well have
been preferable if the objects did prove to be spaceships. It was the least
disturbing alternative!
15
In fact, the Kenneth Arnold sighting was rather untypical. Many that
have followed it are far more strange and worrying. Multiple objects in
formation are not at all common, and are ofen suggestive of an
explanation. However, the encounter over Mount Rainier began man's
forty-year love afair with these mysterious visitors.
Reasonable suggestions were quickly put forward. Did Arnold see an
unusual mirage of the mountain peaks, produced by the very clear air and
warm weather? This is not such a strange idea. Most of us are familiar with
mirages in the summer, where pools of water appear to form on a roadway
ahead, and when you drive towards them they disappear. This is because
nothing was there in the frst place. They are images of the sky transposed
onto the ground by the way light rays bend through hot and cold air
masses. Something similar might have happened over the Cascade
Mountains that day in 194 7.
Dr j. Allen Hynek, called in as a scientifc consultant by the authorities
a few months later, pointed out that Arnold's estimate of distance and
object size did not agree. I f they were 30 km away, in order for Arnold to
see them as 'recognisable' objects the craft would have had to be enormous,
the size of mountains. If they were far smaller, as the witness believed, then
they could not have been more than a few km away. This in turn reduces
their speed to one not impossible for moving aircraf. Of course, if a mirage
was involved this itself would be stationary, and it would be the motion of
Arnold's plane that would create the illusion of movement.
Hynek concluded, in the government's (then secret) fles: 'In view of the
above (the objects) were travelling at subsonic speeds and may, therefore,
have been some sort of known aircraf.' However, the intelligence men had
checked this out. No aircraft were around. The possibility could not apply.
Instead the case was recorded as a 'mirage' in the fnal list of statistics,
when all 13,000 cases which the US Air Force ultimately compiled were
declassifed in 1976.
Arnold himself never bought the 'ofcial' verdict. As an experienced
pilot who had fown the Cascades many times we must respect his opinion.
He was there and we were not. In stating his reasons why it could not be a
mirage (declassifed statement which was written on 12 July 1947) Arnold
points out; 'I observed these objects not only through the glass of my
airplane but turned my airplane sideways where I could open my window
and observe them with a completely unobstructed view [without
sunglasses] . ' This certainly would make a mirage explanat ion rather
unlikely.
Not for the last time we see two major problems of the ofcial UFO
records. Explanations used to dismiss them from all further consideration
ofen fail to correspond with the facts at hand. We are left with a very
difcult choice. An apparently sober, sincere and honest witness - whose
16
background usually checks out as near to impeccable - has reported
something which goes against all our expectations. It is easy to escape by
claiming that the witness must be wrong; but what if that witness were
yourself How would you feel to be told that what you know you saw with
your own two eyes cannot have been t here, because scientists (who have
probably never met you and were certainly not with you at the time of the
events) have decreed that what you claim is impossible.
This is the outcome now faced by hundreds of thousands of witnesses
throughout the world. Can they all be wrong?
It would not be surprising if the Arnold sighting were explained. Most
serious UFO investigators (inside and outside the government authorities!)
recognise that between 80 and 90 per cent of cases can be reduced to
misperceptions of one form or another. The 24 June 1947 case remains in
abeyance, but its importance is not lessened. It was the frst. It set the
mould. From that day on the world could nevr be the same.
As the American military wrestled with the headaches that each new day
and its dozens of sightings brought to them, there was an exciting question
before mankind.
For years we had dreamt oflife on other worlds. Science-fction writers
and Fash Gordon movies had used this to enthrall us. Now the reality
stared our planet in the face.
The universe is a big place, and we might not live here alone.
17
2 DID WE CATCH ONE? -JULY 1947
Roswell, New Mexico, 1500 miles south-east of the Cascade Mountains
lies amidst a land of hot deserts scarred in two quite diferent ways. The
sun beats down relentlessly, baking the earth into weird rock formations;
but an invisible power also cooks the dust. For it was here, in the research
and test grounds of White Sands, Los Alamos and Alamogordo, that atomic
weapons were developed and exploded: a cry to the universe that man had
come of age - or that we could now destroy ourselves.
Is it mere coincidence that this special place became the centre of the frst
true conspiracy of the UFO era, or that it became the focus for many
baling encounters?
On 2 July 1947, at about 9.50 pm, a large glowing object appeared in the
sky above New Mexico. It was seen to head north-west for the desert near
Corona. Hardware-dealer Dan Wilmot and his wife reported it. Just one
more UFO in the fast-mounting pile. If you bear in mind what local farmer
William Brazel has to say, however, then it may have been far more than
that .
A thunderstorm was raging, with ferce lightning cracking the sky in
countless j agged beams. Amidst the tumult Brazel heard a mysterious
explosion. It did not sound like thunder, but he assumed that it had to be.
Next day, in the hot sun, the desert was scattered with debris - peculiar,
light-coloured metal fragments. Something had evidently blown apart
above the ground, dropping pieces onto the desert before continuing its
interrupted fight. Had a plane been struck by lightning and lost part of its
fuselage? The rancher thought little more about it at the time.
That same day a man called Barnett was working out at Magdalene,
about 150 miles away (on the course the Wilmots' UFO had been heading).
He found something shiny refecting in the sand. Going to investigate, he
discovered wreckage of what seemed to be a disc, 9 metres (30 feet) across.
Later a military truck arrived and supervised the investigation of the crash
site. Perhaps this was some experimental aircraft that had sufered
unexpected calamity. Although he did not know about the Roswell
sighting, or Brazel' s curious fnd by his ranch, Barnett did not believe that
this was so. He had very good reason. He had seen bodies - apparently
18
dead and thrown from the wreck. They were not wearing army uniforms.
In fact they did not look human. From a distance it was hard to see detail,
but they seemed to be wearing silvery suits, and they were only 1 metre (3
feet) tall!
That something happened near Roswell in July 1947 is undeniable. For
we now have reams of frst-hand testimony and documents obtained under
the American Freedom of Information Act . They confrm what the
witnesses are saying.
Of course, if this incident was a UFO crash, confusion would have
reigned. Nobody would have known what to do. Eventually decisions
would have been swif and incisive, and if it ever happened again the
authorities would be prepared. On this frst occasion, however, mistakes
might be expected. That is exactly what the facts seem to tell us.
On 6 July 194 7, three days afer Brazel frst found the debris, he drove
into t he nearest town and learned of the stories about fying saucers. Was
this what had crashed, he wondered? He told the local sherif, who in turn
called Roswell Air Force Base. Responding to the call, the ofcer in charge
of intelligence, Major (later Lt. Col. ) Jesse Marcel, made the trek out to the
Brazel ranch. It was so out of the way that an overnight stop was necessary.
When he saw the extraordinary crash material he determined to collect it all
and notify his commanding ofcer right away. There was no doubt in his
mind this was a signifcant discovery.
Meanwhile an information ofcer back at the base had jumped the gun
and leaked the story, believing it to be something of public concern. He was
severely chastised later, but the most important thing at that time was to
stife the 'rumour' . This occurred very swifly, but not before many people
had heard it.
One of these was a certan RCAF ofcer, then dvig across te Amerca
mid-west . He distinctly recalls following the story on the local news
bulletins until the items on the ' UFO crash' suddenly ceased. When he
reached his destination on the eastern seaboard a couple of days later he
expected the story to be world headlines. In fact nobody outside New
Mexico seemed to have known about it. This ofcer went on to become a
TV celebrity in Britain, hosting quiz shows like Double Your Mone and the
talent programme Opportunity Knocks. His name was Hughie Green.
With the debris back at the Roswell base Brigadier General Roger Ramey
came onto the scene to supervise matters. He was extremely concerned
about the premature release of information which is evidenced by an FBI
memo (now released by Freedom of Information, sometimes abbreviated to
Fol). This was from Dallas, Texas, to the FBI headquarters, and was dated
6. 17 pm on 8 July 194 7 - twenty-four hours afer the wreckage had been
ferried back by Major Marcel. The memo is labelled 'Urgent' and headed
;Flying Disc - Information Concerning' . It says, in part, ' Major Curran,
19
HQ eighth air force, telephonically advised this ofce that an object
purporting to be a fying disc was recovered near Roswell, New Mexico,
this date . . . Information provided this ofce because of national interest in
case and fact that [certain media sources] attempting to break story of
location of disc today. '
An ofcial release (watered down somewhat) had been issued by the base
a few hours before this notice to the FBI, but General Ramey was still
worried enough to require a complete dismissal of the case. He ordered that
a 'cover story' be set up. Major Marcel was sent with the wreckage (it flled
an entire bomber plane!) to Wright Field (later Wright Patterson Air Force
Base, Dayton, Ohio). Situated there was the Foreign Technology Division
of the Army/Air Force. It was also there that the ofcial government UFO
project was set into motion a few weeks later.
At the same time as this move, a statement was being publicly released
that explained the whole afair as a mistake. The debris was just the
remains of one of their own weather balloons, which none of the ofcers at
Roswell had seemingly been able to identif. Because of this it would not be
fown to Wright Field.
Despite that, the FBI memo says it was 'being transported to Wright
Field by special plane for examination . . . Major Curtan advised would
request Wright Field to advise (FBI) results of examination. ' lfthey did,
then these results have never been made available under Fol.
Researchers William Moore and Stanton Friedman have provided
outstanding evidence (of which this summary is but a fraction) that
supports the reality of these events. We do not know anything about the
supposed disc and aliens discovered at Magdalene (if we are to believe
Barnett). As for the debris at Corona, it was remarkably light, yet
exceptionally tough, metallic in appearance but diferent from any known
metal and covered partially by pictorial markings not unlike hieroglyphics!
The same description has come independently from many people who saw
it, including the (now retired) Lt. Col. Jesse Marcel himself.
Something crashed. It is almost impossible to believe that it was just a
balloon. The evidence that this was a deliberate invention to buy time and
put the public of the scent seems overwhelming. If it was not a balloon
then what was it, and why do the authorities continue to lie?
It was definitely not a weather or tracking device, nor was it any sort of plane or missile
. . . I was something I had never seen before, or since . . . it certainly wasn't anything
built by us.
(Extract from an interiew about the Roswell crash given in 1979 by the intelligence ofcer
who was frst on the scene in 1947, then Maj or Jesse Marcel.)
These stories are typical of those collected by Moore and others. In hi.
20
careful papers (published between 1 980 and 1 985) he has discovered a
staggering array of witnesses. Their testimony is consistent and very hard
to refute. Yet its consequences are astonishing.
Within little more than a week of the Kenneth Arnold sighting, one of
his 'fying saucers' seems to have cashe in New Mexico. If the evidence is
correct then the answer to at least part of the UFO mystery was in the
hands of the authorities forty years ago, but remains hidden as the biggest
secret on earth. If the evidence is false, then an awfl lot of people (ordinary
citizens, military ofcers, scientists and government ofcials) are liars.
Historian Dr David jacobs points out the difculties of such a cover-up.
' A recovered UFO would constitute arguably the most important scientifc
event in the history of mankind. ' Hundreds of scientists would have to be
involved. Thousands of photographs, saple reports and doments would
exist. Because of this, 'Over the years secrecy would be increasingly more
difcult to maintain. More and more people would have to know abut the
UFO. ' Including, one imagines, all the Presidents since Truman. Unless,
of course, noby told them! This raises all manner of ethical questions. To
keep from soiety the existence of an alien artefact would b a crime aganst
science. It does seem inconceivable that such a conspiracy could be
maintained without leaks.
Nevertheless there have ben leaks. As Dr Richard Hall challenges, there
is ' a small but growing body of credible reports, along with some
supplementary data and doumentation . . . The information i of a calibre
that cannot b ofandedly dismissed. ' It involves swor afdavits and frst
person testimony, sometimes obtained freely, but often with great
reluctance from the person concerned. These people have been tracked
down by researchers like William Moore or his colleague Leonard
Stringfeld (whose data fles on this topic argue a strong case that at least
cwo crashes have happened).
Two crashes? Indeed. Aside from the Roswell afair in 1 947, there
appears to be independent corroboration of a second incident at Kingman,
Arizona. This comes from a Naval Intelligence ofcer who spoke of bdies
he had seen beiig ofoaded at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, allegedly
fown there from Kingman. An engineer involved in Atomic Energy
Commission work with the US Air Force claims that he was taken with
other specialists in blacked-out buses to a desert site near Kingman on 2 1
May 1 953. At the location he saw a 9 metre (30 foot) diameter disc
embedded in the sand and a humanoid fgure almost 1 metre (3 feet) tall,
inside a tent and under guard. It appeared to be dead. He has sworn a legal
document to this efect and his diaries from the time (although cryptic)
certainly confrm he was on a ' special mission' at the stated period.
There are even medical men who say they have studied these bodies. All
their accounts generally agree with one another. Taken together they form
2 1
either the greatest fairytale of all time or the biggest untold secret .
One can perhaps imagine a blanket of secrecy to protect early disclosure
of this discovery. The West may well have wanted to learn the UFO
technology frst . Why, though, afer all this time, does it remain a secret? If
this is true there seem to be limited possibilities. Perhaps the technology is
still beyond us. It may be like a Stone Age man trying to fgure out the
workings of an atomic reactor. Perhaps an agreement was reached with
whoever (or whatever) pilots these craf. In exchange for their friendliness,
their presence would be hidden. If such a bargain has been struck, did we
have any choice in the matter? In a war between pea-shooters and atom
bombs there can only be one victor. If there are aliens who have craft that
can cross the galaxy, it is a fair bet they have weapons that could devastate
the earth.
Between 1947 and 1952 (whilst the atomic tests were at their peak) the
number of UFO sightings around New Mexico reached an extraordinary
level. Ofen they involved green balls of light that behaved exceedingly
strangely and moved exceptionally fast. Noted scientist Dr Lincoln La Paz
masterminded Project Twinkle, an ultra-secret study to attempt to
understand them. These things had succeeded in penetrating one of the
most intensive security nets in the USA, and they had done so as if it did
not exist.
We still do not know what these ' green freballs' were. As soon as
sophisticated monitor stations were set up to examine them, the freballs
moved. When the stations were moved the freballs vanished! They were
not meteors - La Paz (a meteor expert) was adamant on that. They were
examined in top-secret meetings by many worried scientists, with security
clearances that went through the roof. These included Dr Edward Teller,
the ' father' of the H-bomb.
The New Mexico UFOs certainly were real. Many scientists (including
La Paz) saw them, as did Intelligence ofcers. The only question the
meetings had before them was what on earth (or of it) these things might
be! Whilst they continued to zip through the heart of atomic weapons
research it is hardly surprising that the UFO subject was considered to be
of the utmost secrecy.
Had it been otherwise the authorities would have been derelict in their
duty .
. . . the Air Force kne by the middle of July 1947 that saucers were real and not man
made . . . the technolog represented by the [recovered) disc . . . was so far beyond our
own that it could not be understood immediately . . . Therefore it would be n.cessary to
treat the disc as a military secret. This would mean containing all information about it
within some small group.
(Part of paper by US Navy Physicist, Dr Bruce Maccabee.)
22
3 OPERATION INTERCEPT - 1948
With the Soviets practicaly eliminated as a UFO source the idea of interplanetar
spaceships was becoming more popular.
(Captain Edward}. Ruppel!, USAF Intelligence, head of UFO investigation study.)
By early 1948 the US Air Force had already established UFO reality to
their own satisfaction. Lt . General Nathan F. Twining, Chief of Stafof
what was then still the US Army, had called for a security coding to be
granted to what was being colloquially named ' Proj ect Saucer'. He said,
'The phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or
fctitious. ' Advising his bss, Brigadier General George Shulgen, produced
a rapid response. On 30 Decembr 194 7 the order (with a ' 2A' classifcation
security) initiated ' Proj ect Sign' . Wright Patterson Air Force Base in
Dayton, Ohio, was given responsibility for the project.
Eight days later Wright Patterson were having a nightmare.
On 7 January 1948, at 1. 15 pm, several people at Maysville, Kentucky,
called the loal highway patrol to report seeing an unidentifed object high
in the sky. The police contacted the tower at Godman Field, an air base 80
miles west of the town. They had no aircraft in the vicinity but agreed to
check with Wright Patterson. The situation board here showed no trafc
either.
At about 1.35 pm the police phoned Godman again. This time they had
received calls from more towns much frther to the west. If the same object
was involved in bth these sightings it was either exceptionally high (to b
visible over a vast area) or moving exceedingly fast. The loations of the
1. 15 and 1.35 calls were 140 miles apart .
The suggestion was that this had been a fast-moving object, because
witnesses at the second loation (Owensbro) had described a similar large,
round thing moving to the west at what was termed 'a pretty good clip' .
Godman were forced to check again, but there was still no aircraf that
ought to be there. They also realised that if this was a genuine 'intruder' it
had whizzed past them just to the north of the base, assuming its course
had been steady.
23
At 1 . 45 pm T. Sergeant Quinton Blackwell, assistant tower operator at
Godman, scanned the skies to the south of the base (presumably having
seen nothing in the north or west). Here he picked out a dim light in the
hazy sky. It seemed to be static and so he called his superior, Lt . Orner,
who in turn brought out the operations ofcer, Captain Carter, and
eventually the base commander, Colonel Guy Hix. Hix did not arrive until
2. 20 pm, and the object was still more or less in the same position, looking
like 'an ice-cream cone' through binoculars. Other descriptions tell of a
' parachute canopy' or ' an umbrella' .
The original reports from Maysville and Owensboro seem extremely
hard to relate with this stationary thing south of the base. It is more than
possible that the ofcers, alerted by the supposed presence of a UFO, had
scoured the heavens until they found a light which they assumed was the
object. In reality it was not what had traversed 140 miles on an east-to-west
course in just twenty minutes.
Whilst the military personnel at Godman were trying to puzzle out their
dim light in the sky, four North American F-5 1 Mustang trainer aircraft
of the National Guard few fatefully into their trafc zone. Captain
Thomas Mantell, bound for a rendezvous with destiny, was in charge of
what was actually a ferrying mission bound from Georgia to Standiford
Field, just to the north in Kentucky. At about 2.40 pm they passed
overhead, having arrived from more or less the point in the sky where the
UFO was hovering. They had seen nothing. Nevertheless, the bafed
ofcers suggested that Mantell and his men might go and take a look.
One plane, low on fel, went straight to Standiford. The other three, led
by Mantell, turned around and set after the object. Those on the ground
vectored him towards it and Mantell, perhaps bravely, perhaps recklessly,
made a spiralling climb. It is alleged that none of the F-5 1 s were ftted
with oxygen masks and to ascend anywhere much over 1 5,000 feet would
b extremely folish. Pilots have it drmmed into them during the training
that above such an ascent the air is so thin that they risk losing
consciousness with almost certainly fatal consequences. Yet this risk is
precisely the one which Thomas Mantell decided to take.
At 2.45 pm his F-5 1 was well ahead of his two wingmen, who were
desperately trying to tell Mantell that they could go no higher, and that he
ought to give up the chase. One of them is reported to have got to 20,000
feet before descending. Mantell was last seen at 22, 500 feet, still climbing
and saying that he would level of at 25,000 feet for just a few minutes.
In a recent evaluation of this case T. Scott Crain has suggested that the
pilot did have oxygen. It is true that this has always been presumed not to
be the case, but it is also known that Mantell's home base was not the same
as his fellows, and all we know for sure is that the did not have any oxygen.
Crain asks why an experienced fyer would behave in this manner unless he
24
felt secure. A long-term friend of the man, having told the Air Force
enquiry into the matter that it was inconceivable that Mantell would
disregard safety rules, added 'unless he was afer something that he
believed to be more important than his life or his family' .
The last (garbled) messages from Mantell as he rose out of
communication were picked up on the ground, but not recorded. There
was agreement and disagreement amongst Godman tower operators who
heard them. They accept that he had seen the object 'above and ahead of
me', and some thought he said it was ' metallic and tremendous in size' . At
about 3. 1 5 pm he was still trying to close in but apparently getting no
nearer. One ofthe wingmen, who also caught a brief glimpse of the object,
says that it looked like a 'teardrop' and 'seemed fuid' . These are similar
descriptions to those ofered by the ground observers.
A more interesting, yet dubious, claim comes second-hand via someone
who was a friend of this wingman. He supposedly was informed
'confdentially' that the airman had seen the UFO more clearly. As
explained to investigator Leonard Stringfeld, it had seemed to release a
beam that had struck Mantell's F-51! The reality status of this
uncorrobrated account must remain in doubt, although Stringfeld regards
it as sincere.
One of the F-5 1 s landed, refuelled and took of afer the now missing
pilot . He did not fnd Mantell's aircraf or the UFO. At 3. 45 pm, afer two
hours, during which it had merely drifted a little to the west, Godman
fnally lost sight of the UFO from the ground. About one hour later came
the news that Mantell's F-5 1 had crashed, destroying the plane and klling
its pilot. His watch had stopped at 3 . 1 8 pm. A ground witness had seen the
F-5 1 , but not the UFO, reponing that it had plunged in an almost vertical
dive and broken up in mid-air.
The fnal link i n this disturbing case came from an anonymous caller
who (at abut 3. 50 pm) telephoned Godman feld to say that he had seen an
object in the sky south of Madisonville (even frther west of the base than
Owensboro and over 200 miles from the frst sighting location at
Maysville). He had been foxed by the light until he studied it through a
telescope, then he had identifed it as a balloon. Quite why he then
bothered to report it to the Air Force remains unknown.
The ofcial accident investigation was handled with urgency and in
silence, although the fact of the crash was impossible to hide, as were the
civilian UFO sightings that seemed (to many) to have an obvious bearing.
The Air Force knew that the cry would easily emerge that Mantell had
been shot from the skies by dastardly aliens, if they gave even a hint that
they too were taking such a view quite seriously! This 'ray gun' theory for
Mantell's death has been a popular myth of the past forty years, but has
almost no substance. Not even the most biased UFO researcher has
25
disputed the basic Air Force stance on the reason for the crash, that the
pilot blacked out due to lack of oxygen, lost control of his aircraf and did
not regain consciousness before it hit the ground. He had certainly made no
attempt to eject.
Of course, what does remain in considerable doubt is exactl
y
what
Mantell was chasing when he met his terrible fate.
According to Captain Ed Ruppelt, when he later became head of the Air
Force UFO investigation project, he had to reconstruct the details from a
halfdestroyed micro-flm record. Crucial facts (e. g. the names of Mantell's
wingmen) were missing from the reports he took over i n 1952, less than
fve years afer the crash. However, he says that the fles demonstrated that
the intelligence ofcers who were involved quickly formed the impression
that Mantell had died in pursuit of a UFO, and that the UFO was probably
a spaceship! Of course, no such explanation could be ofered to the public.
It would provoke enormous panic and pressure for information the Air
Force could not then give, because they had no idea what was going on
t hemselves. So an answer - any answer - was necessary.
Fortunately, they had just taken on a professional astronomer, Dr J.
Allen Hynek from the Ohio University, and Wright Patterson used him as
a scientifc consultant to try to resolve the puzzling cases. Hynek had
calculated that the planet Venus (brightest 'star' in the heavens) was in
more or less the exact point south of Godman where the UFO had been
obsered. Planets, just like the sun, do drift slowly west as the day drags on,
exactly as the object witnessed had apparently done.
This make-do solution was accepted by most folk, willing to put the
UFO business down to a fad or delusion in any event. Those who had seen
something themselves, or who had spoken to the growing number of
witnesses, or simply had more faith in the intelligence of Air Force pilots,
became very suspicious of the motives behind this dismal excuse for an
explanation.
In their written accounts the Air Force team were far more cautious and
more interested in the possibility of a balloon being to blame. Sadly for
them, they could fnd no shred of evidence that a balloon ought to have
been where the UFO was. So their report concluded, 'it might have been
Venus or it could have been a balloon. Maybe two balloons. It probably
was Venus except that this is doubtful because Venus was too dim to be
seen in the afernoon' . This masterpiece of gobbledegook was not made
public in 1948. It takes little skill at translation to realise that it really
means the Air Force did not have a clue, but desperately wanted to create
the illusion that they had solved the case.
In 1952 Hynek went public when demolishing the Venus answer. The
planet is bright (at night) but can only be seen as a tiny speck of light on
exceptionally clear days and if you know precisely where to look for it. 7
26
January 1 948 was not a clear day and something much more substantial
than a speck of light had been reported. It is just about possible that the
observers from the Godman tower had found Venus by scanning the
horizon with binoculars. It is very improbable this is what Mantell saw.
Venus, of course, was not the object that moved from Maysville to
Owensboro in twenty minutes.
Looking back with the beneft of hindsight Captain Ruppelt was
under no external pressure to solve the case quickly. He also knew that a
classifed navy project had launched 'sky hook' balloons from southern
Ohio in the late 1 940s. Such objects could climb very high, were metallic
in appearance, would be readily described as 'teardrop' or 'umbrella'
shaped and might well have drifed into the area given the weather
conditions and wind directions on that January day. Because the 'sky
hook' project was classifed in 1 948, neither the staf at Godman
nor the original Air Force investigators would be likely to know
about i t.
Al l of this is fne in theory. The onl y problem was that Ruppelt could
fnd no evidence that a 'sky hook' project release had occurred on that day,
or any relevant day. Indeed, psychologist Dr David Saunders, writing
twenty years later afer Colorado University had studied UFOs under a
halfmillion dollar grant from the US government, says most defnitely that
the records they were given access to (supposedly absolutely complete)
showed no release from Ohio on 7 January 1 948.
Ruppe i t concluded that Mantell could have seen a balloon; but for such a
balloon to have been seen from all the scattered locations of the other
sightings it would have had to travel far beyond the maximum possible
wind speed or at a height way above that achievable by even the
sophisticated 'sky hook' . Perhaps the original UFO was just that - a UFO;
then, by tragic coincidence, Mantell was vectored onto a balloon that
chanced to be visible from Godman at the same time.
We will sadly never know for certain, but the case remains one of the
major mysteries in the UFO story.
When credible reportings of sightings are received the Air Force is auempting to send up
jet interceptor planes in order to obtain a beuer view of these objects.
(From one of the douments released in 1 976 under the US Freedom oflnformation Act.
Part of an FBI status report on UFOs.)
The Mantell death was a vital turning point in UFO history. In the light of
posterity we can see a solution that might be feasible. Explanation or no
explanation, however, the newly-created Project Sign saw the pilot as
earth's frst casualty in a 'war of the worlds' . Although most hoped the
death was not an indication of overt alien hostility, it was assumed amongst
27
many intelligence ofcers that the UFO subject had now become very
serious and potentially deadly.
Matters were not helped when 1 948 continued to bring more aerial
encounters. Military aircraft, following the operation intercept order, were
told to observe but not to provoke an attack.
On 24 July an Eastern Airlines DC-3 fying out of Houston bound for
Atlanta nearly collided with a UFO over Montgomery, Alabama. The two
civilian pilots (Clarence Chiles and John Whitted) saw the cigar-shaped
object very clearly as it fashed by with a turbulent wake. They had to make
an emergency evasion. Some sceptics proposed it was a meteor, with which
the air crew never agreed. Meteors do not create turbulence and should b
seen by hundreds on the ground. This one was not . The Proj ect Sign
evaluation was 'unknown', but years later this was altered to 'meteor' when
nobody was looking.
Again on 1 October at Fargo, North Dakota, another F-51 met a UFO.
Lt. George Gorman was coming in to land when he saw a light ahead of
him. He started an intercept. For several minutes a game of'cat and mouse'
ensued before the light rose up and disappeared. He told Sign, 'I had the
distinct impression that its manoeuvres were controlled by thought or
reason. ' Several people on the ground, the pilot of a light plane fying
nearby, and his passenger, all saw the UFO. The ofcial explanation is that
it was a lighted balloon.
Then, on 1 8 November, a Norh American T -6 Texan lining up to land
at Andrews Air Force Base near Washington DC saw another UFO. The
pilot once more obeyed instrctions and even switched his lights on and of
but brought no response from the UFO. As he tried to close in the light
accelerated over him and squirmed away like a slippery eel as he circled
back round. Afer ten minutes the UFO veered east and headed towards the
Atlantic. The pilot got a good look. It was ' a dark grey oval-shaped object
smaller than my T -6' .
On the ground at the base ofcers and fight crew saw the whole thing.
They had no explanation, and neither did Project Sign this time.
The memory of Mantell must have haunted these brave attempts to fnd
out what lay behind the UFO mystery, but the intelligence staf at Wright
Patterson needed no more convincing. Based on these accumulating cases
from trained observers they concluded that UFOs were real and probably
extra-terrestrial. They put this into an 'Estimate of the Situation' report
and sent it to the very top.
Chief of Staf, General Hoyt Vandenberg, threw the report back. Sign
fought this by direct petition. Look at the facts, they told the Pentagon. It
is obvious that neither we nor the Russians have anything that can perform
like this. Vandenberg was unmoved. He ordered Proj ect Sign to destroy all
copies of their report .
28
A few weeks later Sign was asked to produce their fnal analysis. It
showed one-ffth of cases unexplained and called for a more detailed study.
Shortly aferwards Proj ect Sign was closed down and its team members
transferred elsewhere.
29
4 A BREACH IN OUR DEFENCES - 1950
This matter is considered top secret by inteligence offcers of both the army and the Air
Forces.
(Secret brief on 'Protection ofVital Installations': Subject UFOs: 31 Jan 1949.)
The cold frozen wastes of Alaska are an outpost of the western military
defences. Only the narrow Bering Strait separates this desolate glacier
locked landscape from the USSR. An accident of geography has turned the
otherwise depopulated zone into one where surveillance and security are at
their highest levels.
During the frst three years of UFO reports there had been many
instances of a security breach. Unknown to almost everyone (even those
who had sufcient clearance to know something about ofcial UFO study)
one secret group - Project Twinkle - was endeavouring to fnd out what
kept fying over atomic weapons research centres and roketry development
bases with terrifying ease. No suggestion that they ever did fnd out has
been made public. UFOs had also buzzed sensitive airfelds and power and
communication systems, but nobody knew what to do about it. Top-secret
evaluations and discussions (such as the one quoted abve) had struggled to
fnd ways to cope with the probl em. None had succeeded.
At the same time as these things the public had been informed of the
closure of UFO interest and that there was really nothing going on.
On 22 January 1 950 Lt. Smith, a US Navy patrol plane pilot, was
conducting a routine security fight over Alaska. It was 2. 40 am. He was
from Kodiak, an island base to the south of the Bering Sea, well into
American territory and presumed safe. Suddenly his radar detected an
object 20 miles north. It vanished quickly, without being seen by the pilot.
Now on alert, Smith continued to monitor his scope. At 2. 48 am either
the same or a diferent object turned up south of Kodiak. If it had moved
on a steady path since the last radar reading its speed would be about 225
mph, by no means unreasonable for an aircraft .
Smith radioed Kodiak, but was advised that there was no known trafc
where his blip was. As they debated this, the radar ofcer, A. L. C. Gaskey,
was reporting that his screen was being scrambled in a way he had never
30
experienced before. It was as if some high-powered electronics were
interfering with the radar beam, making it difcult to follow the course of
the UFO.
Meanwhile, moored south of Kodiak was the USS Tila mock. Quarter
Master Morgan was standing guard on the deck as 3 am approached.
Suddenly, 'a very fast moving red glow light, which appeared to be of
exhaust nature, seemed to come from the south-east, moved clokwise in a
large circle in the direction of, and around, Kodiak, and returned out in a
generally south-east direction. '
Morgan called MMC Carver, the other watch ofcer. He also saw the
object, which proved equally inexplicable to him. He described it as like a
large ball of orange fre. It was in view an estimated 30 seconds. Despite its
change in direction (fying both into and with a fairly blustery wind) and
the utter silence of the location, no sound whatsoever was heard from the
obj ect . Had it been a jet aircraft it surely would have made a noise.
Lt . Smith was continuing his airbrne patrols with the radar interference
now gone. Suddenly the scope detected a new target fve miles from him
and moving exceptionally fast. The time was now 4. 40 am, almost two
hours afer the events described above. The blip was actually leaving a trail
on the radar screen, so rapid was its motion. Immediately the pilot called all
his crew and told them to look out for the UFO. They saw it almost right
away, closing the fve-mile gap in just ten seconds, suggesting a then quite
fantastic speed of 1 800 mph!
Smith now turned to pursue the object, which was ahead of them and
shooting of. He did try to get closer, but the object was too manoeuvrable.
Witness descriptions speak of 'two orange lights - rotating about a
common centre like two j et aircraft making slow rolls in tight formation' .
Then, suddenly, the thing made a sharp turn and was heading straight for
Smith's aircraf! In his words, he 'considered this to be a highly threatening
gesture' and switched of all his lights to make the plane less of a target in
the inky sky. The UFO few by and moved of south-east, disappearing
inside four minutes.
Nobody at Kodiak had an answer for this case, which was one of the
earliest of a type called the ' radar-visual ' . When a strange target is seen
behaving unusually on a radar screen, then it is possible to opt for some
sort of distortion of the system or a weather-induced radar mirage; but if
the object is also visually spotted by witnesses on the ground, in the air, or
even both, then this interpretation becomes less credible. As in this
example, it presents prime scientifc evidence for a genuine unknown.
The US Navy evaluated the case highly. No fewer than 36 copies of the
detailed report were distributed to various security agencies. Of these, none
were ever released or published. The FBI copy (from which this summary
is written) came to light a quarter of a century later, missing much crucial
3 1
data. These include eight appendices containing signed statements and
scientifc analysis of the peculiar radar interference.
The six-page report we do have categorically rules out most possible
answers and concludes, 'the objects must be regarded as phenomena . . .
the exact nature of which could not be determined' .
Afer less than thirty months of the UFO mystery the US government's
fling cabinets were fast choking beneath the weight of cases ofthis calibre.
Ifthere is an extraterrestrial civilisation which can make objects as are reported, then it
is most probable that its deelopment is far in advance of ours . . . such a civilisation
might obsere that on earth we now have atomic bombs and are fast deeloping rockets.
In view of the past history of mankind, they would be alarmed. We should, therefore,
expect at this time above all to behold such visitations.
(Part of the fnal repn of Project Sign, written by Professor George Valley, of MIT, one
of the chief scientifc advisers to the US President. Dated: February 1949. )
The rejection of the 'Estimate of Situation' report about alien UFOs, the
abrupt closure of Proj ect Sign and the remarkably rapid creation and
dissolution of a sequel venture (Project Grudge) all seem very hard to
comprehend, particularly when seen against the background of infowing
cases and secret reports such as that by Professor Valley. Grudge was
initiated in the same month as the above analysis but published its fnal
verdict inside a few weeks. This argued that cases should be vigorously
'debunked' , that ways be found to defuse interest in UFOs and that the
subject be demoted to a routine level within the Air Force.
It is understandable why some see in these actions the likelihood that the
government of the world's then most powerful nation did not reject the
' Estimate' but accepted it. Given this, Grudge would be seen as an exercise
to try to divert the problem from public attention, its study having passed
into the hands of top security cleared scientists deep below the surface.
There are persistent stories that such a team of people did (does?) exist .
The code name MJ- 1 2 (or Majestic Twelve) is said to apply. We will see
some of the evidence later in the book. Bear in mind, though, that i MJ- 1 2
was created around this time its security classifcation would a t least have
b
e
en equal to that granted the 'Manhattan Project' (the building of the
atom bomb) during the recently concluded war. Its existence would almost
certainly be unknown to everyone publicly assoiated with UFOs (meaning
journalists, intelligence ofcers, press spokesmen an
d
scientists such as Dr
]. Allen Hynek, then involved with the Air Force's open study of the feld).
Not to have created a team such as MJ- 1 2 would have to be seen as an act
of great folly. Considering the evidence as it stood in 1 948 or 1 949, the very
least that was necessary was a cont inued monitor. You must make your
own mind up about whether the President of the USA made a reckless
error of judgement or took a sensible security precaution.
32
The afertaste of these political moves was the creeping suspicion about
an ofcial 'cover-up' . Reporters, in particular, had studied dozens of cases
and knew better than anyone the strength of the evidence. Negative
pronouncements in the face of this and the absurd explanations (e. g. the
Venus answer to the Mantell death) implied that something devious was
afoot to almost everyone who had bothered to check the subject out .
In fact, the chances are t hat the authorities were simply bafed. There is
little doubt that the prospect of extraterrestrial spacecraf was taken
seriously, but, unless something had indeed been captured at Roswell in
July 194 7, the cover-up was more likely a product of ignorance than of
secret knowledge. The dire need was to fnd out what was going on: where
the UFOs came from, what they were doing here, and so on. It may well
have seemed sensible to manufacture the impression that UFOs were
considered explained as a method of distracting private scientifc enterprise
from probing the subject and possibly going public with its discoveries. I f
discoveries were t o be made i t could well have been deemed important that
security-cleared scientists got to them frst (preferably western security
cleared scientists).
We might anticipate some sort of allied plan at this stage to prevent other
NATO countries giving the game away. Alternat ively, perhaps those in
Europe merely looked to the USA for a lead, saw it publicly decrying
UFOs and followed the same path.
Of course, journalists had no access to secret reports (not even the ones
we have now thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, let alone the ones
we do not have now! ). This gave them no perspective on the issues
involved. They only saw the arrogant dismissals of mounting evidence and
interpreted these as the masking of guilty knowledge. The usual reason
cited by those who considered the problem at this time was that the
authorities wanted to prevent panic and society collapsing under the
discovery of a 'threat' from 'Mars' . The famous radio broadcast by Orson
Welles (where a modern dramatisation of the H. G. Wells story War of the
Worlds had been so realistic that thousands had believed it was actually
happening! ) was often quoted.
So, the amateur UFO hunters began to accuse those co-ordinating US
Air Force public relations groups of huge conspiracies. The latter, who in
all probability had no awareness of any such thing, not surprisingly, treated
this with great aversion and assumed the sleuths to be sensationalist cranks.
This drove a wedge between the two sides, creating a battlefront situation
which was doomed to perpetual stalemate. This may even have been part of
the secret plan, since it bought the American government invaluable time.
Of all the proponents of the conspiracy theory it was a retired US
Marine, Donald Keyhoe, who was to have the most impact. He had
interviewed several military witnesses and had enough friends in the
33
services to give him an insight into what was going on. His perceptions of
the early years were blinkered and can now be seen as somewhat distorted,
but he was undoubtedly better informed than almost anyone not
constrained to total silence.
Keyhoe spent most of 1 949 putting together an explosive article entitled
'The Flying Saucers are Real', which was published by True magazine the
same month as the Kodiak, Alaska, events unfolded outside the gaze of
everyone without an 'A' security clearance.
The article evaluated the best cases then made public, including Mantell,
the Eastern Airlines DC-3 sighting, and George Gorman. It concluded that
the Air Force was hiding the alien reality ofUFOs.
True Magazine for January 1 950 is reputed to have been one of the most
widely read publications of all time. It provoked a sensation. Within weeks
Key hoe had expanded his work into a book, using the same title. This was
the frst in what has now became a deluge of literary eforts, although
English author Gerald Heard was only weeks behind with his study of the
same cases, entitled Riddle of the Flying Saucers.
These steps (according to security papers now released) turned Keyhoe
into a security risk. He was put under FBI and CIA scrutiny, as indeed
have been other leading UFO researchers in the years since.
If we were forced to accept the ofcial view on UFOs we might well ask
why a ' myth-making' writer about a 'non-existent' phenomenon would be
of such concern to the intelligence services!
34
5 INVASION WASHINGTON DC - 1952
The reporrs of incidems convince us char rhere is somerhing going on char musr have
immediate attemion.
(H. Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director of Scientifc Intelligence, CIA, 2 Dec 1 952. )
In those early years of the UFO phenomenon one cry was ofen heard. If
UFOs are real, why don' t they show themselves to everyone and land on
the White House lawn? Indeed, that theme was woven into several science
fction movies in the frst half of the 1 950s. In the summer of 1 952, science
fction almost became a reality.
With Proj ect Grudge on hold, the Air Force was ofcially no longer
interested in the subj ect. Yet behind the scenes there was frantic activity.
Intelligence Ofcer Captain Edward J. Ruppelt had been assigned to
reshape the study and feld the mounting concern within the Pentagon.
That was October 1 9 5 1 . By March 1 952 his recommendations for a new
project were accepted and the code name Project Blue Book was assigned to
it. Ruppelt, who quickly became convinced of UFO reality and ofen
investigated ases on his own initiat ive and even at his own expense, says
the title was based on a college exam paper flled with tough questions.
Sightings had not exactly brimmed over during the period of transition.
December 1 9 5 1 brought only ten reports to the USAF fles, whilst May
1 952 gave them a more promising 79. Of course, the media were recording
many others, since the average witness was unlikely to call his nearest air
base to alert an ofcial project which (so far as he knew) might or might not
exist, and might or might not care about the sighting anyway!
However, this was the calm before the storm. June produced 1 49 cases,
and the next two months over 700 between them! This was now the
greatest wave the USA had ever experienced, or indeed was to experience.
During this time the USAF 'Operation Intercept' programme was in fll
swing. Naturally, it was not publicised, but in his 1 956 'memoirs' (having
lef the Air Force utterly frustrated by their failure to support his calls for
better efort) Ruppelt recorded several of them. For instance, he tells how
two North American F-86 Sabre fghters were vectored onto a target in
the thick of this summer 1 952 wave. The pilots had a broad-daylight view
35
of the UFO, fred tracer rounds at the unknown and watched it accelerate
away out of range. Upon landing, the ofcer who had fred was debriefed
by his Colonel, who accepted the pilot's explanation and sympathised with
his actions. They were contrary to all ofcial policy, however, so the base
commander simply informed Ruppelt, who then destroyed the report
before giving it to Washington.
The overture may have been insignifcant, but the main performance
that followed caught the full imagination of the public.
At 1 1 . 40 pm on the night of 19 July 1 952, the long-range 'overfy' radar
at Washington DC civilian airport picked up a formation of seven 'blips'
that were I 5 miles south and not far from Andrews Air Force Base. A
controller on duty, Ed Nugent, presumed them to be military trafc as they
moved at between 1 00 and I 30 mph. He was puzzled, as none were
supposed to be there, but his bafement gave way to great concern when
two of the targets suddenly accelerated at amazing speed and vanished of
the scope within seconds!
Nugent called over his senior controller, Harry Barnes, who in turn
brought two more experienced radar men to watch. They had no solution
for the remaining blips. At this busy airport there is also a second radar,
in a separate building, which is a short-range system to guide planes in
and out . Barnes called them on the intercom to ask if they were seeing
anything peculiar. Controllers Howard Coklin and Joe Zacko were . . . and
it was exactly the same thing! Even more importantly, they got in touch
with Andrews Air Force Base, who had also been monitoring unknown
blips.
For three radar systems all to be recording this dramatic 'invasion' of the
nation's capital was immediately signifcant. They knew a systems
malfunction could not be to blame, but Barnes ordered his radar checked
anyway. There were no faults. Meanwhile the targets had moved at speeds
of up to 7000 mph, before stopping rapidly and then crising about,
behaviour patterns never witnessed before by any of the experts. What is
more, they had intruded upon restricted air space - taking them right over
the White House.
Various attempts were made by Barnes to get the Air Force to send
interceptors afer the objects. This should have required no justifcation.
Yet he was at frst informed there was 'not enough information', then that
it was ' in hand', and fnally that it was 'being taken care of', but nobody
seemed to know who had the responsibility for the launch. Whilst the
debate went on, at least two civilian aircraf fying in and out of
Washington had been asked to keep their scanners peeled. Between I and
3 am there were two sightings of 'blue-white' lights whizzing past, or
'streaks of orange' . These sound like meteors that the alerted pilots
misperceived in their anxiety. A ground observer at Andrews Air Force
36
Base also reported seeing a 'ball of orange fre' when he went to look for a
blip that was on screen.
Finally, just bfore dawn, an interceptor dzd arrive from Delaware. It was
too late. Nothing was visible.
Of course, there was no way to keep this out of the press. Blue Book
faced blazing headlines and a real dilemma. Ruppelt few to Washington,
yet, inexplicably, go no co-operation. He was not even granted a staf car to
interview the scattered witnesses. Use the bus, he was told! Then he was
advised that he was spending too much time away from Wright Patterson
(the UFO project home base) and i f he did not get back he would be
reported AWOL! Giving the perfunctory 'no comment' to the hungry
press (which many doubtless saw as proof of a cover-up) he gave up in
disgust.
Assuming that the Ai r Force are telling the truth about Ruppelt's role, i t
is very hard to imagine why he was not ordered to solve thi s case double
quick. To be more or less shunted away from it hints at the possibility that
it was considered too hot for Project Blue Book to handl e. No doubt
somebody at the Pentagon was trying to fgure it out.
Then it happened all over again! At about 9.30 pm on the night of 26
July (one week later) more blips were recorded at Washington. The local
press got wind of this immediately and a reporter rang Ruppelt within
minutes of the start of the encounter, to ask what the Air Force was doing
abut this new invasion. However, Ruppelt, the head of the government's
UFO team, had not even been told about it! Still smart ing from his
treatment the week before, he told the j ournalist (in understandable anger),
'I have no idea what the Air Force is doing; in all probability it is doing
nothi ng. '
Whilst the press pondered thi s new 'cover-up' , Ruppelt was fred into
action. Regardless of hurt pride, this was his job. He phoned Major Dewey
Fournet, an engineer consultant to Blue Book, because he lived i n
Washington DC. He tol d Fournet to get himself and anyone else he
considered useful to the airport as fast as possibl e. Fournet, a radar
specialist with the project called Holcombe, and AI Chop (the Air Force
press ofcer) all arrived at the radar sets in time to see the unknowns and
listen to ground-to-air communications as pilots were steered towards them.
Two Republic F-94 Thunderjet/Streak jets arrived at 1 1 . 25 pm (no
delaying tactics this time!). As they did, the many reporters who had heard
what was happening and had focked to the tower were ordered out. The
pretext (air force sources called it this themselves) was that communication
techniques with an interceptor were confdential. As Ruppelt points out,
this was nonsense, since anybody with a radio set could hear them when
they liked! The truth was that most of the Blue Book personnel in that
radar room believed this would be the night when indisputable proof of
37
alien UFOs was fnally achieved. This historic moment must b evaluated
by the authorities frst - before the press were told (zfthe press were told).
Over several hours there were visual sightings, many radar trackings, jets
closing in on lights, only for this and the radar blip to vanish when the
aircraf got near. Then, as the plane few by, the blips would ofen come
back again! The games went on until dawn, but without any fnal proof,
just more unexplained events.
Even so, all those in the radar room were persuaded that the targets were
'very probably caused by solid metallic objects' and Fournet, in his report,
pointed out that the screens also showed targets created by the weather.
Since they were easily recognisable to the experienced operators, this was
not the answer to the feet of unknowns.
Despite this, at a press conference 48 hours afer the UFOs had gone (for
good), and even though it was admitted, 'we don't know the answer
positively and there's no use pretending that we do', the Air Force verdict
was given. The radar targets were caused by the weather - inversions or
'angels' (a form of mirage). The visual sightings were nothing but a few
stars and meteors that everyone mistook in their excitement. Major General
John Samford, director of Air Force Intelligence, called the conference (one
of the biggest ever held since World War Two). The other main
protagonists, Ruppelt, Fournet, Holcombe and Chop, were present but
took a back seat. Most of the press, with some relief, accepted the solution.
Afer all, they presumed, the US Air Force would surely not pretend there
was nothing to worry about if the nation's capital really had been invaded
by unknown phenomena.
In 1 969, when the US government sponsored a scientifc analysis of the
UFO subject at the University of Colorado, radar expert Gordon Thayer
concurred. His report does show that many of the visual sightings
(especially those from the ground) probably were not UFOs. A great deal of
suggestibility was around on these two nights. However, it leaves the radar
returns at best only possibly explained. Remember that more than a dozen
radar operators saw these targets. None supported the idea of mirages. The
meteorological conditions were by no means perfect for such efects and
have, of course, been duplicated many times since without the same results.
Dr James McDonald, an atmospheric physicist at Arizona University,
was a specialist in such optics, and he looked at Thayer's data. His
comment was that the conditions defnitely could not have produced the
efects seen.
It is also a little curious that the 1 000-page fnal study report by Colorado
University has only half a per cent devoted to this case, all of which is a
fairly heavy account of radar optics. Yet, Dr Michael Wertheimer, a
psychologist on the project, had gone to Washington DC on behalf of the
group to investigate the encounters. He interviewed as many of the eye-
38
witnesses as he could fnd. Dr David Saunders, another psychologist on the
team, wrote his own ' alternative report' - published a few months before
the government's ofcial version. In this book (UFOs? Yes!) he does
describe Wertheimer's work (missed out of the ofcial project). He says of
it, 'virtually every witness that Wertheimer talked with disagreed with
Samford's temperature inversion explanation, observing that an
experienced operator has no trouble identifying [one] . . . Wertheimer's
own conclusion was that the sightings cannot be explained. '
Strange that a research project that cost the US tax-payer half a million
dollars and was approved by the National Academy of Sciences as being
objective should have mislaid this contradictory material and printed only
the negative view.
It also certainly did not impress those within the A Force who had ben
involved. General Samford may have had good reason to ' debunk' the
story, but he was not present. Ruppelt had been (as an investigator).
Fournet, Holcomb and Chop had all ben witnesses. Within three years of
the waving away of the Washington invasion, Ruppe It had lef the Air
Force to write a serious book admitting UFO reality and speculating that
he was just a ' front man' . Fournet had quit to join a leading civilian UFO
group, and AI Chop resigned his Air Force position to work as an adviser
on a Hollywod doumentary, released to big audiences in 1 955. It told the
full story about early UFO sightings.
Of course, this could all be coincidence; or it might mean that these
people saw through the fa
- e
DfPATmNI OF IHt Al9 fOkCE
t a t: a f .= : : ,Q @ $ -
NmIf
L lJ J1n l
nzpJ ned LI ShU
KIJLL
. hrl1 I n I 11rn l ng of f Oc (ppra i Nteb OlOL ) , $m 05m
uc"rh1 pl Itt pa trol wn w unusuAl l" ighU. outs\ de, th k gue I t
M WodDri d9e . Th i nki ng n l rcr8 f l lght hve cruhtd or ben fuft80
Mw, the) ca l ed tor pe,.1 ui on to go ouJt dt tht gut to lnvcs t t gat.
: O;
d
f! t1 1 f! =! t;:: r"!:::d
1
!!:: !h:.::!r :in
0
oCJ:;,
tn tni"f oi. The obje,t .. t destrl bed 8 Ml ng -c.l l t I n 1pparance
and Crl angyhr t n ship, eppnn i Nt el r t. U ttree - ten 1cras th
bau 014 opporl 1ul y tw .ter& l gh. It t l l .lnlttd tht tnt i rt loren
"I l 8 ot te l i ght. TM obJtct l t Ui f l1d # pI s i ng md l i ght M toP 4M
I binl ( l ) of l l ul l l ghh undcOrst h. O obJect vet hvtr1ng or on l gs .
U6 l M w0 ePrO6hed the obJc t . M Wntuverd through Q trttl
Jnd dl upprec. At thi s t i the ani uh on nei. f8m wnt tnta 1
frenzy. Tm obJect 8 briefl y s i ghted opproai utel1 an hur htr ntlP
the bock gt8 .
Z- Th nrzt d11 . three dtprtu tons l 1 12 deep and f in dHWl er Wf
found .ere th oDjcc t had D en $i ghttd w th gr,d. The fol l o in9
n i ght (29 Oc 8) tht ort ., d\tcled for md t l o. BU/g read 1 n'
of 0. 1 l t rocntgn8 wre rtcorded l th pk redi ngs n the thre de
prui ons 1nc nur tm center of tht trHngle forMd 1 th deprent ol.
A neorb, t re had .deru ( . 05 . 07) rtid t ngs w U Ii de of the tree
toard th deprtti on s .
. L ter I n the n i ght 8 red I , I ke l t gt wl seen throgh the lr#tt -
1 t wvzd aMut and pclltd. At om pint i t IPIrfd t o thro
. o f f t1 o ..1 ng
,rt l c 1 es and then brok# into f i ve seprte lli te objects and then di s
eppea red. lad hte l r therut ter , three sur- l i ke o)ets wre not i ced
1 n "" tky , tw objec u to th Mrfh 1nd one to m 8out h,
11 of . tt ch
.re abt 0 off tm hrhon . 1hc obj ecu NWd rapi dl 1 l n thirp angular
IvellnU 1nd dhphyed re. grttn nd b ue 1t ght s. TM obects to th
nortl appa red to b el l i pt l tal througn an 11 2 pmr tens . They then
turned W fu1 1 t t Ml r$- The ob]etts t o the nrlh r...ned in the 8k for
In hur or 1re. The object to the SOuth vm v l s b l e for tw ar thrtt
Mvm 1nd bad 0w s tre of l l g"t fr tim to t t . kwm$ I ndwt
dl l s . incl ud i ng the unders i gned . vl tnesl6d t h ct l l I1 es 1 n priQrlpl\
n J. '
Col , UMf
WP
t
I M 4PMf
2 1 6
M| N|$TPY OP DEFENCE
MIN BUI LDI NG WHITEHALL LONDON SWlA 2HB
.AO4$(CII ai O.aTt
FOR YM AME FCG
0I05 of 5t kF) I0T ! 7 ) I ' March ! 8
A l
Thank you tor your l etter of Z February vitl tle enclosed
fro11 1s Jenny Randles of Bi rc h'OOd 1 Warr ington .
L should fi rst of al l po i nt out that the sole i n tereJ t ot the
Mi n i s t r y of Dfence i n reported sightings of Un i dent i f i ed Fl yi ng
Ob jects ( UFOs > i s to establ ish vhether they have a n y beari ng on the
defence of the countr y .
Th ere i s n o organ i sati on i n t he Mi n i s t r y of Df e n c e iippo inted
sol el y for the pur ps e of stud y in& UFOS , and no staff are employed on
the subject full t i11e . The reports ve recehe are referred to the
.taff i n the Opaltlent who are respon .i bl e for the a i r defence of
the Un i ted Ki ngdom , and they e x ami ne the reports a. part or their
normal dut1 e. . Unle.s there are defence 1mpl 1cat ion. 'e do not
attempt to ident i fy .i ghti ngs and ve cannot i nforll oluerver. of the
probable i denti ty of the object seen . The Dpartment could not
j us t i fy the e x pend i ture of pub l i c funds on invest i gati ons which go
beyond the pure defence i ntere.t . .
The o n l y i nforation w e have on the al leged "UFO . i ght i ng" at
Rendl e3ha FoleSt i n Oeembel 80 is the report b y Co l onel Ch arl e.
H al t 1 of the Un ited States Ai r Force 1 whi ch 1s Randl e. menti ons i n
h e r letter . We a r e .ati sfi ed tlat t he event. de.eri bed a r e o f no
defence .i gni ficanc e . I can a. s ur e you t hat t her e i . no que.t i on of
attempting to cov er up any i nci dent or mi .hap 1 nor are we a t tempting
i n any way to obscure the truth.
a11 al so enclo.ing with thi s eopi e. of Par l i amentary
Questi on s 1 one of which l 8 that put down by 51 1 Patr i ck Wal l and
which Ms Randles al so 1ention s .
Lord Tr efgarne
2 1 7
Colonel's top
secret report
tells the fads
Myster crah
in exploding
wall of colour
e Aalmals flee
from strange
glowing object
UFO LANDS
IN SUFFOLK
$ILVk
. ."'`- -
-~``+"'' `- ~ ~
= - `--=
` 1
.
.- =n:
s. h .. B-t =
| :- - .n n cwuqe m
VEHICLE ::.; .:-- ::: : :::-;
2 1 8
INDEX
Abduction cases 60- 3, 65 - 70, 1 40-
Acklington, RAF base 92- 3
Adamski, George 49 - 50, ! 53
Adamski, Zigmund 1 5 3 - 4
Aerofot 1 1 5 - 1 7, 1 28 - 9
Aircraft, misidentifed as UFO 62
Aircraft, UFO encounters with 23 -8,
30 - 1 , 35 -9, 4 1 - 4, 46 - 8, 72 - 4,
92 - 3, 1 02- 5, 1 1 0- 1 7, 1 22- 30,
1 44 - 6, 1 5 4-6, 1 75
Alamogordo, USA 1 8
Aleixo, Professor Hulvio 97-9
Alien boie 1 8 - 1 9, 2 1 - 2, 5 1 - 3
Alien, sightings of 48- 9, 5 1 - 3, 60- 2,
65 - 70, 80, 97 -9, 1 06 - 9, 1 40- 1 ,
1 50- 3, 1 62 - 3, 1 64, 1 7 1
Allan, Chris 50- I
Allingham, Cedric 50- I
Alton, David 1 97- 8
Alvarez, Professor Luis 40
America, see USA
Andrews, USAF base 36
Animal reactions to UFOs 76 - 7, 1 06 - 9,
1 43, 1 52, 1 78
Arizona, University of 38, 57, 65
Arnold, Kenneth 1 3 - 7
Ashland, Nebraska, USA case 65 - 70
Atomic Energy, UFO links with 1 8,
2 1 - 2, 30, 32, 40, 58 - 9, 84, 94 - 6,
1 02, 1 42 - 6, ! 50 - 3
Aviano, Italy case 1 78- 9
Bailey, Martin 1 97
Ball lightning, misidentifed as UFO 57,
1 39, 1 87
Balloons, misidentifed as UFO 20, 24 - 7,
28, 1 44 -6
Barcelona Airport 1 26
Barnard Castle, Durham, UK case 1 39
Bass Strait, Australia case ! 54 - 6
Basterfeld, Keith 1 39
BBC 50 - 1 , 80 - 2, 1 1 3, 1 32, 1 96
Beams emitted by UFOs 66, 69, 70, 80,
21 9
98, 1 04 - 5, 1 08, l l 5 - 1 7, 1 50 - 3, ! 55
Begg, Paul 83
Benitez, juan 1 06 -9, 1 25, 1 63 - 4, 1 76 - 7
Bentwaters, USAF base, see Rendlesham
Forest
Berkner, Dr Lloyd 40
Berliner, Don 56, 58
Blindness, caused by UFOs 1 37, 1 39 -4 1 ,
1 48 -9
BOAC 46 - 7, 7 1
Boeche, Ray 79, 1 34, 201 - 2
Bolender, Brigadier General CH 72, 75
Bolton, Lapcs, UK case 1 40- 1 , ! 59
Books about UFOs 34, 38 -9, 49 - 5 1 , 62,
64, 7 1 , 79, I 04- 5, l l l - 1 2, I 70, I 72,
1 85 - 6, 1 9 1 - 2, 20 1
Boscombe Down, Sussex, UK case 4 1 -4,
7 1 , 89 - 90, 1 90
Brazel, William 1 8 - 1 9
Brindisi, Italy case 1 27
Brown, Antony Montague 1 89
Buen Retiro, Bolivia case 1 34 - 5
BUFORA 87, 1 42, 1 72, 1 93 -4, 2 1 3
Burns, caused b y UFOs 1 37, 1 39 -4 1 ,
1 48 - 9
Bush, Dr Vannevar 52
Butler, Brenda 78, 1 43, 1 78, 1 9 1
Cable News Network 202
Canary Islands, Spain case 1 63 - 5
Cancer, caused by UFOs 1 5 2 -3
Car stop cases 54 - 9, 1 36 - 40, 1 54
Cardif, Wales, UK case 1 96
Carrington, Lanes, UK case 1 43 -4
Carter, President Jimmy 200
Cash/Landrum case 1 47 - 9, 1 83
Cavero, General Carlos 205
Chadwell, H. Marshall 35
Chalker, Bi l l 95, 1 56, 1 7 1 - 5, 1 92, 1 94
Chapman, Robert 7 1
Chernobyl nuclear accident 8 1 , 1 42,
1 47
Cherwell, Lord 1 89 - 90
Chicago Tribune 1 85, 1 87
Chinese Airways 1 29
Chiumiento, Antonio 1 78
Chop, AI 37 - 9
Churchill, Sir Winston 1 89 -90
CIA and UFOs 34, 35, 39 -40, 44 -5, 49,
74 - 5, 1 92, 20 1
Circles in cornfelds 1 72- 3
Clamar, Dr Aphrodite 68 -9
Clark, Jerome 52
Clarke, David 1 38
Close Encounters of the Third Kind 83, 1 5 1 ,
1 80, 1 94, 205
Coca, Colonel Ariel 1 34 - 5
Cochran, Air Chief Marshall 43
Colborne, Scott 79
Colorado University Study 27, 38 - 9, 40,
47, 56, 63 - 7, 70, 1 02, 1 32, 1 42,
1 57 - 8, 1 80, 1 90
Condon Report see above
Conrad, Colonel Ted 83
Cordy, John 1 1 3 - 1 4
Cork and Orrery, Earl of 1 94
Cosmic Watergate 8, 75
Cover-up, basi s for 8 - 9, 1 5, 2 1 - 2, 32 - 4,
39 -40, 74 - 5, 82, 90- 1 , 1 2 1 , 1 32,
1 70, 1 76 - 8, 1 82 -4, 1 89- 206
Coyne, Major Lawrence 1 02 - 5, 1 1 5
Craig, Professor Roy 1 42
Crain, T. Scott 24 - 5
Crash and retrieval ofUFOs 1 8 - 22,
5 1 - 3, 90, 1 75, 200
Creighton, Gordon 97, 1 81
Cuddington, Bucks, UK case 1 60 - I
CUFOS 1 02, 1 05, 2 1 3
Cwmbran, Wales, UK case 1 95, 1 97
Daily Express 1 72
Daily Mirror 1 72
Dakelia, Cyprus case I 08 - 9
Dan Air 1 27
Day, Peter 1 60 - 1
De Caro, Chuck 202
Debunking 32, 45, 49, 57, 63, 7 1 , 80,
1 04 - 5, 1 1 2, 1 76
Decrease in UFO sightings total 62, 1 52
Dee Estuary, Wales, UK case 1 27
Devereux, Paul 1 65
DIA and UFOs 74, 1 34
Disney, Walt 45
Dowding, Lord 46
Dreams after UFO sightings 62, 1 52
Eastern Airlines 28, 34
Education programme theory 83 -4, 1 08,
1 23, 1 92, 205 -6
Edwards, Ken 1 50- 3
Eisenhower, President 5 1 - 2
Electrical efects, caused by UFOs 30- 2,
220
54 - 9,66, 70, 7 3 -4, 80, 1 03-4, 1 23,
1 25, 1 36 -4 1 , 1 47, 1 5 1 -6, 1 59, 1 64,
1 7 8-9
Electrostatic feld 1 38, 1 40, 1 59
Englund, Lieutenant Bruce 83
Esterle, Dr Al ai n 1 83
Estimate of Situation report 28, 32, 43
ET83, 206
Exley, Squadron Leader Derek 1 93
Extra-Terrestrial theory 1 7, 2 1 - 2, 23,
26 -8, 32 - 3, 4 1 , 42, 46, 58 - 9, 62,
65- 70, 82, 1 26, 1 3 1 - 2, 1 45, 1 62 - 3,
1 83 - 4, 200, 202, 204 - 5
Falkville, Alabama, USA case 1 62 - 3
Fargo, North Dakota, USA case 28
Farnborough, RAF base 44, 1 44, 1 93
FBI and UFOs 1 5, 1 9 - 20, 27, 3 1 , 34, 58,
1 92, 201
Finningley, RAF base 1 93
Flying Saucer, origin of term 7, 1 4 - 1 5
Fying Saucer Reiew 97, 1 85
Fogarty, Quentin 1 1 0 - 1 4
Ford, President Gerald 6 3 -4, 200
Foreign Technology Division, USAF 20,
1 34
Fournet, Major Dewey 3 7 -9, 44
Frame, Squadron Leader Jan 1 74
Freedom oflnformation Act 1 5, 1 9, 27,
33, 40, 74 - 5, 78, 83, 90, 1 02, 1 34, 1 85,
1 92, 200 - 3, 205
Friedman, Stanton 20, 1 36
Fuller, John 62
Fuller, Paul 1 72
Galley, Robert 1 80, 1 81
Gemini 4 space encounter 1 32 - 3
Gendarmerie and UFOs 1 46, 1 8 1 - 2
General Belgrano sinking 1 9 1 , 1 94
Geomagnetism and UFOs 1 81
GEPAN 1 82 - 4, 2 1 3
Gill, father William 1 7 1
Gleason, Jackie 52
Godfrey, Alan 69- 70, 1 5 3 -4
Goman Field, Kentucky, USA case
23 - 7
Goldwater, Senator Barry 54
Gose Bay, Lbrador, Canada case 46 - 7
Gorky, USSR case 1 88
Goudsmit, Professor Sam 40
Government study ofUFOs by Australia
1 7 1 - 5
Brazil l 29- 30, 1 5 9- 1 60
Britain 42 -4, 70- 1 , 76 - 83, 1 2 3 -4, ,
1 47, 1 89 - 99
Canada 52
France 1 46 - 7, 1 80 -4
lran 7 2 -4
Italy 1 78 - 9
Spain 1 25 - 6, 1 63 - 5, 1 7 6-8
USA 1 5 - 1 7, 2 1 - 2, 23, 27, 30, 32- 4,
38 -40, 49, 5 1 - 3, 63 - 4, 70, 72, 74 - 5,
1 49, 200 - 3
USSR 67, 70, 1 1 5 - 7, 1 85 - 8
Green freballs 22, 30, 1 26, 1 43
Green, Hughie 1 9
Greenwood, Barry 203
Guerrin, Dr Pierre 1 83
Haines, Dr Richard 1 22, 1 56
Hall, Dr Richard 2 1
Hal lucinations 99, 1 4 3
Halt, Colonel Charles 76, 79, 82, 83
Harris, Harry 69 - 70, 1 54, 1 87
Hartmann, Dr William 1 5 7 -8
Havik, Leif 1 65
Headingley, Yorks, UK case 1 05
Heard, Gerald 34
Heseltine, Michael 8 1 , 1 8 1 , 1 98
Hessdalen, Norway coses 1 65 - 6
Hi l l , Beny and Barney 60- 2, 65, 68,
69
Hill-Norton, Lord 1 92 - 3
Holt, Dr Alan 1 47 - 8
Hough, Peter 5 -3 , I 54
House of Lords 83, I 94
Howard, Captain James 46 - 7, 7 1
Hucker, P. M. 8 1 , 1 98
Hufman, Texas, USA case 1 47 - 9,
1 83
Hynek, Dr J. Allen 1 6, 26, 32, 40, 44 - 5,
90, 1 02, 1 05, 1 21 , 1 37, 1 65, 1 80
Hypnosis, used in UFO cases 62, 66 - 70,
1 52
Iberia 1 26
lbiza, Spain case 1 24 - 5
Indian Head, New Hampshire, USA case
60 -2, 65, 68, 69
Inner Mongolia, China case 1 29
Tllttrnarional UFO Reporter 52, 2 1 3
Jacobs, Dr David 2 1
Jameson, Derek 1 96
JANAP 1 46 72
Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope 1 1 2, 1 23
Johnson, Peter 1 28, 1 43
Jupiter, misidentifed a s UFO 60 - 2
Kaikoura, New Zealand case 1 1 0- 1 4
Keyhoe, Maior Donald 33-4
Keys, David 1 45
Kilroy-Silk, Robert 1 23-4
King, Barry 46
Kingman, Arizona, USA case 21
Klass, Philip 1 04 - 5, 1 33
Kodak 1 60
Kodiak, Alaska, USA case 30 - 2
22 1
Komchatkha, USSR 1 88
Kondair 1 44 - 6
Korean Airlines 1 88
La Baleia, Brazil case 97- 9
L Paz, Dr Lincoln 22, 1 26, 14 3
Lakenheath, Sufolk, UK case 1 90
Lancashire, UK case 1 23-4
Landing traces, caused by UFOs 76, 80,
98 - 1 01 , 1 34 - 5, 1 46 - 7, 1 7 1 - 3
Las Bardenos Reales, Spain case 1 76 - 7
Laser beams and UFOs 1 65 - 6
Leiston, Sufolk, UK case 1 42
Levelland, Texas, USA case 54 -9, 63,
1 36
Levitation, caused by UFOs 1 04 - 5
Lie detector test on witness 67
Life 1 58
Lina, Brigadier General Octabio 1 29- 30
Lina, Juri I 86
Loch Raven, Maryland, USA case 1 36 - 7
Lognov, Dr Anatoly 1 85, 1 87 - 8
Long, Viscount 1 94, 1 95
Lorenzon, Coral and Jim 48- 9
Los Alamos, USA 1 8
Los Llanos, Spanish AFB 1 25
Luton, Bedford, UK case 89- 90
Maccabee, Dr Bruce 22, 88, 1 1 3, 1 58
Maella, Spain case 1 26
Malmstrom, USAF base 1 02
Manhatlan Project 32, 64
Manitou Springs, Colorado, USA case 1 5
Mansfeld, Ohio, USA case 1 02 - 1 5, 1 1 5,
1 62
Mantell, Captain Thomas 24 - 7, 33, 34,
92
Maralinga, Australia case 94 - 6, 1 74
Marcel, Major Jesse 1 9 - 20
Mathewson, Andrew 1 97
Mauge, Claude 1 81
Mayhew, Lord 1 98
McDivitl, Brigadier General James 1 3 1
McDonald, Dr James 38, 57 -8, 65, 1 90
McDonnell, Captain H. 46 - 7
McMinnville, Oregon, USA case 1 58
Meaden, Dr Terrence 1 72
Medical examination by aliens 62, 68 - 9,
70, 1 40
Melburne Airport 1 54 - 6
Menzel, Dr Donald 57, 7 1
Meteors, misidentifed a s UFO 28, 80,
1 05, 1 26, 1 43
Mildenhall, USAF base 201
Mi nsk, USSR case 1 1 5 - 1 7
Mirages, misidentifed as UFO 1 6, 38 -9,
47, 1 1 3
Misperceptions 1 7, 26, 1 0, I I 0
MIT UFO study 32
MJ- 1 2 team 32, 49, 5 1 - 3, 75, 200
MoD and UFOs 42 -4, 48, 80, 1 1 0- 14,
1 25, 1 60 - 1 , 1 90
Monarch Airlines 1 26
Montgomery, Alabama, USA case 28
Moore, Patrick 5 1
Moore, William 20- I
Moreland, Squadron Leader Donald 76,
78, 79
Morgan, Colonel Sam 79, 83, 202
Mount Clemens, Michigan, USA case
90
Mount Rainier, Washington, USA case
1 3 - 1 7
Movie flm taken ofUFOs 48, 80,
1 1 0- 1 4, 1 25, 1 60- 1 , 1 90
Movies about UFOs 62, 83, 1 02, 1 1 0,
205 -6
Mrzyglod, Ian 9 3
MUFON 79, 1 22, 1 48, 2 1 3
Muro, USAF base 52
Murray, Derek 94 -6
Murrow, Ed 1 4
Murto, Professor Roberto 98 - 9
NASA 63, 87, 1 22, 1 32 - 3, 1 47 -9, 1 52,
1 80, 200
NATO 33, 43 -4, 76, 1 7 8 -9, 1 80, 1 90,
200, 202
Nebraska, University of I OS
Nelson, Lanes, UK case 1 3 7 -9
News ofthe World 79, 82, 1 96
Niemtzow, Dr Richard 1 83
North Weald, RAF base 4 7
Novosibirsk, USSR 1 86 - 7
Noyes, Ralph 43, 48, 1 89 -92, 1 96 -99
NSA and UFOs 200 - 3
Oberg, James 1 33, 1 86
O' Brien, Dr Brian 63 -4
Obserer 1 45, 1 97
Ofcial Secrets Act 71 , 75, 92, 1 91 , 1 99
Ohio, University of26
Oldroyd, Granville 1 38
Olds, Major Robin 92
Omlli 83
Operation Mai n Brace 4 3- 4, 1 90
Oppenheimer, Dr Robert 40, 52
Opportunity Knocks 19
Orford Ness lighthouse 77, 80
Oxford, Ox on, UK case 92- 3
Page, Dr Thornton 40, 45
Phillips, Ted 1 00- I
Photographs ofUFOs 43, 48, 49, 83, 90,
I I 0- I 4, 1 32 - 3, 1 56, I 57 -66
Physical illness, caused by UFOs 60- 2,
66, 98 -9, 1 06 -9, 1 37, 1 39, 1 43,
1 48 - 9, 1 54, 1 64
222
Plesetsk, Soviet base at 1 86
Poher, Dr Claude 1 80-2
Police and UFOs 65 - 70, 80, 97, 1 00- 1 ,
1 2 3 -4, 1 37, 1 46 - 7, 1 5 1 -4, 1 62- 3,
1 64, 1 76
Pompidou, President 1 81
Ponting, Clive 1 9 1 , 1 94
Popovich, Pavel l 85, 1 87 -8
Project Blue Book 35 -40, 42, 44, 49,
56 -8, 63 -4, 70, 72, 74 - 5, 88, 1 02,
1 2 1 , 1 34, 1 36, 1 74, 1 90
Project Grudge 32, 35, 88
Project Hessdalen 1 65 - 6
Project Magnet 52
Project Moon Dust 1 34- 5
Project Saucer 2 3
Project Sign 23, 27 -9, 32, 44, 88
Project Twinkle 22, 30, 55
Projected images, caused by UFOs
1 07 - 9
Psychic experiences and UFOs 1 08
Queensland saucer nests I 7 1 - 2
RAAF 94-6, 1 7 1 - 5
Radar trackings ofUFOs 30- 2, 36 - 9,
41 - 2, 73 - 4, 76, 83, 92 - 3, 1 02,
1 1 0- 1 4, 1 1 7, 1 25, 1 27, 1 29- 30, 1 44,
1 63 - 5, 1 75, 1 79, 1 8 1 , 1 88, 1 90
Radiation, caused by UFOs 76, 8 1 , 83,
1 36 -49, 1 83
RAF 1 9, 41 - 4, 47 -8, 69, 7 1 , 92 -6,
1 43 -4, 1 89 - 99
Raines, Ella 92
Ramey, Brigadier General Gordon 1 9 -20
Ramon, Stafs, UK case 48
Redon, Pere 1 76
Rees, Merlyn 70- 1 , 8 1
Reese, USAF base 55
Rendlesham Forest, Sufolk, UK case
76- 83, 1 05, 1 08, 1 42- 6, 1 77, 1 95 - 9,
201 - 2
Ridpath, Ian 82
Risley, Cheshire, UK case 1 50 - 3
Rivers, Congressman Mendel 63
RobertSon, Dr H. P. 40
Robertson panel 39 -40, 44 - 5, 49, 63,
1 90
Robey, Steve 1 5 5 -6
Roed, Odd-Gunner 1 65
Roesterberg, Jennie 48
Rogue River, Oregon, USA case 88- 90
Rorschach ink blot test 66
Rosmead, South Africa case I 00- I
Roswell, New Mexico, USA case i 8 -22,
33, 5 1 ' 53, 54, 80, 200
RPVs 87, 91
Ruppelt, Captain Edward ]. 7 , 23, 26 - 7,
35 -40, 42- 3, 44, 49, 88
Rutledge, Dr Harley 1 65
SAFE Ai r 1 1 0 - 1 4
Sagan, Dr Carl 64
Sakhalin Island, USSR 1 88
Salandin, Captain Jimmy 4 7 -8
Samford, Major General John 38 -9
Sanarov, Dr Vladimir 1 8 6 - 7
Sandys, Duncan 1 89
Sarbacher, Dr Robert 49, 52 - 3
Saunders, Dr David 27, 39, 1 02
Schirmer, Herb 65 - 70
Schuessler, John 1 47 - 8
Shahrokhi, Iranian AFB 72
Shulgen, Brigadier General George 23
Sigismund, Richard 1 02
Simon, Dr Benjamin 62, 68
Sizewell nuclear power station 1 42 -4
Skyhok balloons 27
Sounds, caused by UFOs 1 06, 1 38, 1 46,
1 54, 1 64, 1 79
Southend, Essex, UK case 4 7 - 8
Soviet Academy of Sciences 1 8 5 -8
Soviet secret weapons theory 1 5, 23, 28,
42, 1 1 0, 1 86
Space programme and UFOs 32, 58 - 9,
60, 63, 67, 84, 96, 1 1 0, 1 26, 1 32 - 5,
1 86
Spaulding, William 1 58
Spielberg, Steven 83, 1 02, 1 1 0, 1 5 1 , 1 82,
205 -6
Sprinkle, Dr Leo 66 -8, 1 59
Sputnik 58- 9
St Athan, RAF base 1 96
Stanley, John 1 94
Stealth Aircraf 87, 90- 1
Steinman, William 52
Stephens, Dr Duncan 62
Strand, Erling 1 65
Street, Dot 78, 1 78, 1 91
Stringfeld, Leonard 21 , 25
Sud bourne, Sufolk, UK case 1 43
Sunday Express 71
Sunday Times 1 83
TAE Airlines 1 24 -6
Talavera La Real, Spain case 1 06 - 9, 1 43,
1 77
Taylor, Phillip 1 27
Tehran, Iran case 72 -4, 1 1 5
Telepathy, alien contact by 66 - 70
Teller, Dr Edward 22
Teran, Salvador 1 2 5 -6
Thayer, Gordon 38, 4 7 , 1 90
Time loss, caused by UFOs 60- 2,
65- 70, 1 40- 1 , 1 5 1 , 1 54
Time travel theory 1 3 1 -2, 1 33, 204
Times 76, 90, 1 87
Tingling, caused by UFOs 1 38, 1 40, 1 59
223
Titchmarsh, Pam 1 9 1
Todmorden, Yorkshire, UK case 69- 70,
1 5 3 -4
Topclife, RAF base 4 3
Townsend-Withers, Wing Commander
4 1 -4, 7 1 , 89 - 90, 93, 1 90
Trans Europa Airlines 1 26
Trans-en-Provence, France case 1 46- 7,
1 83
Trefgarne, Lord 1 97 - 9
Trinidade Island, Brazil case 1 5 9-60
Trud 1 87
True 34
Trufaut, Franis I SO
Truth drugs 99
Tully, Australia case 1 7 1 - 2
Turner, H. 94
Twining, Lieutenant General Nathan 23
UAP 88, 1 40, 1 66
UFO cases i n Australia 94 -6, 1 39, 1 50,
1 5 4 -6, 1 7 1 - 5
Bolivia 1 34 - 5
Brazi l 97 -9, 1 29- 30, 1 59 -60
Canada 46 - 7
China 1 29
Cyprus 1 08 -9
France 1 46 - 7
Italy 1 27, 1 78 -9
New Guinea 1 7 1
New Zealand 1 1 0- 1 4
Norway 1 65 - 6
South Africa I 0- I
Spain 1 06 - 9, 1 24 - 6, 1 63- 5, 1 76 -8
Tibet 1 40
UK 40-4, 47 -8, 69 - 7 1 , 76- 83,
89 -90, 92 - 3, 1 05, 1 23 -4, 1 2 7 -8,
1 3 7 -9, 1 40 - 1 , 1 42 -6, 1 50-4, 1 59,
1 60- 1 , 1 90, 1 95 - 9, 201 - 2
USA 1 3 - 40, 54 - 68, 88 - 90, 1 02 - 5,
1 36 - 7, 1 40, 1 47 - 9, 1 58, 1 62 - 3
USSR 1 1 5 - 1 7, 1 28-9, 1 87 - 8
UFO, deaths caused by 23 - 7, 1 50 -6
UFO, origin of term 7
United Nations and UFOs 7
Upper Heyford, USAF base 1 23 - 4, 1 6 1
USAF and UFOs 23, 25 - 9, 32, 3 5 -40,
42, 44, 49, 56 -8, 60, 63 -4, 72, 74 - 5,
76 - 83, 88 -9 1 , 1 02, 1 2 1 , 1 24, 1 90
US Congress and UFOs 63 -4
Valentich, Frederick 1 50, 1 54 -6
Vallee, Dr Jacques 7 , 63, 1 02, 1 37, 1 80,
1 8 1 , 1 83, 1 85
Valley, Professor George 32
Van Neuman, John 52
Vandenberg, General Hoyt S. 28, 43, 45
Vanquelef, Genevieve 1 08
Vehicle interference cases, see Car stop
Velasco, Jean 1 46 - 7, 1 83
Venus, misidentifed as UFO 26 - 7, 33,
1 1 2 - 1 3, 1 7 1 , 1 7 5
Wall, Major Sir Patrick 70, 1 94, 1 96
WAPIT 1 54
Warminster, Wilts, UK case 1 73
Warri1gton Guardia1 1 50 - l
Warrington, Peter 1 27, 1 60
Wart on, RAF base 1 24
Washington DC, USA case 28, 36 -9,
43 -4, 63, I l l , 1 90
Washington Institute 52
Watton, RAF base 76, 80
Weather, misidentifed as UFO 38 - 9, 4 7,
1 1 3
Webb, Walter 62
Wellington Airport 1 1 0- 1 4
Wells, H. G. 33
224
Wertheimer, Dr Michael 38 - 9
Whirlwinds, misidentifed as UFO 1 7 1 -2
White Sands, USA 1 8, 58, 63
Williams, Brigadier General Gordon 79
Williamson, Dr David 87
Wimbledon, Squadron Leader Freddie
1 9 1
Wright-Patterson, USAF base 20, 2 1 , 23,
26, 37, 1 34
Wyoming, University of66
WYUFORG 1 54, 2 1 4
Xin Jiang, China case 1 2 9
YUFOS 9 1 , 1 05, 1 89, 21 4
Zeidman, Jennie I 02
Zheltukhin, Dr Nikolai 1 1 5, 1 88
Zigel, Dr Felix 67, 70, 1 85 - 6