 C00242525
 CIA's Role in the Study of UFOs, 1947-90
 Gerald K. Haines
 B4y't
 pBU
 44
 While Agency concern over
 47
 UFOs was substantial until
 the early 1950s, CIA has
 since paid only limited and
 peripheral attention to the
 phenomena.
 Gerald K. Haines is the National
 Reconnaissance Office historian.
 An extraordinary 95 percent of all
 Americans have at least heard or read
 something about Unidentified Flying
 Objects (UFOs), and 57 percent
 believe they are real.' Former US
 Presidents Career and Reagan claim
 to have seen a UFO. UFOlogists-a
 neologism for UFO buffs-and pri-
 vate UFO organizations are found
 throughout the United States. Many
 are convinced that the US Govern-
 menc, and particularly CIA, are
 engaged in a massive conspiracy and
 coverup of the issue. The idea that
 CIA has secretly concealed its
 research into UFOs has been a major
 theme of UFO buffs since the mod-
 ern UFO phenomena emerged in the
 late 1940s.2
 In late 1993, after being pressured by
 UFOlogists for the release of addi-
 tional CIA information on UFOs,]
 DCI It James Woolsey ordered
 another review of all Agency files on
 UFOs. Using CIA records compiled
 from that review, this study traces
 CIA interest and involvement in the
 UFO controversy from the late 1940s
 to 1990. It chronologically examines
 the Agency's efforts to solve the mys-
 tery of UFOs, its programs that had
 an impact on UFO sightings, and its
 attempts to conceal CIA involvement
 in the entire UFO issue. What
 emerges from this examination is that,
 while Agency concern over UFOs was
 substantial until the early 1950s, CIA
 has since paid only limited and periph-
 eral attention to the phenomena.
 Background
 The emergence in 1947 of the Cold
 War confrontation between the
 United States and the Soviet Union
 also saw the first wave of UFO sight-
 ings. '['lie first report ofa -flying
 saucer" over the United States came
 on 24 June 1947, when Kenneth
 Arnold, a private pilot and reputable
 businessman, while looking for a
 downed plane sighted nine disk-
 shaped objects near Mc. Rainier,
 Washington, traveling at an estimated
 speed of over 1,000 mph. Arnold's
 report was followed by a flood of addi-
 tional sightings, including reports
 from military and civilian pilots and
 air traffic controllers all over the
 United States 4 In 1948, Air Force .
 Gen. Nathan Twining, head of the
 Air Technical Service Command,
 established Project SIGN (initially
 named Project SAUCER) to collect,
 collate, evaluate, and distribute within.
 the government all information relar.
 ing to such sightings, on the premise
 that UFOs might be real and of
 national security concern.5 ..
 The Technical Intelligence Division
 of the Air Material Command
 (AMC) at Wright Field (later
 Wright-Patterson Air Force Base) in
 Dayton, Ohio, assumed control of
 Project SIGN and began its work on
 23 January 1948. Although at first
 fearful that the objects might be
 Soviet secret weapons, the Air Force
 soon concluded that UFOs were real
 but easily explained and not extraor-
 dinary. The Air Force report found
 that almost all sightings stemmed
 from one or more of three causes:
 mass hysteria and hallucination,
 hoax, or misinterpretation of known
 objects. Nevertheless, the report rec-
 ommended continued military
 intelligence control over the investi-
 gation of all sightings and did not
 V~?       /991
 C00242525
 rule out the possibility of extraterres-
 trial phenomena.6
 Amid mounting UFO sightings, the
 Air Force continued to collect and
 evaluate UFO data in the late 1940s
 under a new project, GRUDGE,
 which cried to alleviate public anxiety
 over UFOs via a public relations cam-
 paign designed to persuade the public
 that UFOs constituted nothing
 unusual or extraordinary. UFO sight-
 ings were explained as balloons,
 conventional aircraft, planets, mete-
 ors, optical illusions, solar reflections,
 or even large hailstones." GRUDGE
 officials found no evidence in UFO
 sightings of advanced foreign weapons
 design or development, and they con-
 cluded that UFOs did not threaten
 US security. They recommended that
 the project be reduced in scope
 because the very existence of Air
 Force official interest encouraged peo-,
 pie to believe in UFOs and
 contributed to a "war hysteria" atmo-
 sphere. On 27 December 1949, the
 Air Force announced the project's
 termination. 7
 With increased Cold War tensions,
 the Korean war, and continued UFO
 sightings, USAF Director of Intelli-
 gence Maj. Gen. Charles P. Cabell
 ordered a new UFO project in 1952.
 Project BLUE BOOK became the
 major Air Force effort to study the
 UFO phenomenon throughout the
 1950s and 1960s.8 The task of identi-
 fying and explaining UFOs continued
 to fall on the Air Material Command
 at Wright-Patterson. With a small
 staff, the Air Technical Intelligence
 Center (ATIC) cried co persuade the
 public that UFOs were not extraordi-
 nary.' Projects SIGN, GRUDGE,
 and BLUE BOOK set the cone for
 the official US Government position
 regarding UFOs for the next 30 years.
 Early CIA Concerns, 1947-52
 CIA closely monitored the Air Force
 effort, aware of the mounting number
 of sightings and increasingly con-
 cerned that UFOs might pose a
 potential security threat. 10 Given the
 distribution of the sightings, CIA offi-
 cials in 1952 questioned whether they
 might reflect "midsummer
 madness."" Agency officials accepted
 the Air Force's conclusions about
 UFO reports, although they con-
 cluded that "since there is a remote
 possibility that they may be interplan-
 c ary'aircraft, it is necessary to
 investigate each sighting." t2
 A massive buildup of sightings over
 the United States in 1952, especially
 in July, alarmed the Truman adminis-
 tration. On 19 and 20 July, radar
 scopes at Washington National Air-
 port and Andrews Air Force Base
 tracked mysterious blips. On 27 July,
 the blips reappeared. The Air Force
 scrambled interceptor aircraft to inves-
 tigate, but they found nothing. The
 incidents, however, caused headlines
 across the country. The White House
 wanted to know what was happening,
 and the Air Force quickly offered the
 explanation that the radar blips might
 be the result of "temperature
 inversions." Later, a Civil Aeronautics
 Administration investigation con-
 firmed that such radar blips were
 quite common and were caused by
 temperature inversions. 13
 Although it had monitored UFO
 reports for at least three years, CIA
 reacted to the new rash of sightings by
 forming a special study group within
 the Office of Scientific Intelligence
 (OSI) and the Office of Current Intel-
 ligence (OCI) to review the
 Situation. 14 Edward Tauss, acting
 chief of OSI's Weapons and Equip-
 ment Division, reported for the group
 that most UFO sightings could be eas-
 ily explained. Nevertheless, he
 recommended that the Agency con-
 tinue monitoring the problem, in
 coordination with ATIC. He also
 urged that CIA conceal its interest
 from the media and the public, "in
 view of their probable alarmist tenden-
 cies" to accept such interest as
 confirming the existence of UFOs. 15
 Upon receiving the report, Deputy
 Director for Intelligence (DDI) Rob-
 ert Amory, Jr. assigned responsibility
 for the UFO investigations to OSI's
 Physics and Electronics Division,
 with A. Ray Gordon as the officer in
 charge. 16 Each branch in the division
 was to contribute to the investigation,
 and Gordon was to coordinate closely
 with ATIC. Amory, who asked the
 group to focus on the national secu-
 rity implications of UFOs, was
 relaying DCI Walter Bedell Smith's
 concerns)' Smith wanted to know
 whether or not the Air Force investiga-
 tion of flying saucers was sufficiently
 objective and how much more money
 and manpower would be necessary to
 determine the cause of the small per-
 centage of unexplained flying saucers:
 Smith believed "there was only one
 chance in 10,000 that the phenome-
 non posed a threat to the security of
 the country, but even that chance
 could not be taken." According to
 Smith, it was CIA's responsibility by
 statute to coordinate the intelligence
 effort required to solve the problem.
 Smith also wanted to know what use
 could be made of the UFO phenome-
 non in connection with US
 psychological warfare efforts. 18
 Led by Gordon, the CIA Study
 Group met with Air Force officials at
 Wright-Patterson and reviewed their
 data and Findings. The Air Force
 claimed that 90 percent of the
 reported sightings were easily
 68
 C00242525
 Amateur photographs of alleged UFOs
 Passoria, New Jersey, 31 July 1952
 )ce
 ~4N,q~~B jE
 C00242525
 Minneapolis. Minnesota. 20 October 1960
 70
 BAST COPY
 AYE'
 C00242525
 44
 accounted for. The other 10 percent
 were characterized as "a number of
 incredible reports from credible
 observers." The Air Force rejected
 the theories that the sightings
 involved US or Soviet secret weapons
 development or that they involved
 "men from Mars"; there was no evi-
 dence to support these concepts.
 The Air Force briefers sought to
 explain these UFO reports as the mis-
 interpretation of known objects or
 little understood natural
 phenomena.19 Air Force and CIA
 officials agreed that outside knowl-
 edge of Agency interest in UFOs
 would make the problem more
 serious. 20 This concealment of CIA
 interest contributed greatly to later
 charges of a CIA conspiracy and
 coverup.
 The CIA Study Group also searched
 the Soviet press for UFO reports, but
 found none, causing the group to
 conclude that the absence of reports
 had to have been the result of deliber-
 ate Soviet Government policy. The
 group also envisioned the USSR's
 possible use of UFOs as a psychologi-
 cal warfare tool. In addition, they
 worried that, if the US air warning
 system should be deliberately over-
 loaded by UFO sightings, the Soviets
 might gain a surprise advantage in
 any nuclear attack. 21
 Because of the tense Cold War situa-
 tion and increased Soviet
 capabilities, the CIA Study Group
 saw serious national security con-
 cerns in the flying saucer situation.
 The group believed that the Soviets
 could use UFO reports to touch off
 mass hysteria and panic in the
 United States. The group also
 believed that the Soviets might use
 UFO sightings to overload the US
 air warning system so that is could
 not distinguish real targets from
 Because of the tense Cold
 War situation and
 increased Soviet
 capabilities, the CIA Study
 Group saw serious national
 security concerns in the
 flying saucer situation.
 99
 phantom UFOs. H. Marshall Chad-
 well, Assistant Director of OSI,
 added that he considered the prob-
 lem of such importance "that it
 should be brought to the attention of
 the National Security Council, in
 order that a communitywide coordi-
 nated effort cowards it solution may
 be initiated."22
 Chadwell briefed DCI Smith on the
 subject of UFOs in December 1952.
 He urged action because he was con-
 vinced that "something was going on
 that must have immediate attention"
 and that "sightings of unexplained
 objects at great altitudes and travel-
 ing at high speeds in the vicinity of
 major US defense installations are of
 such nature that they are not attribut-
 able to natural phenomena or known
 types of aerial vehicles." He drafted
 a memorandum from the DCI to the
 National Security Council (NSC)
 and a proposed NSC Directive estab-
 lishing the investigation of UFOs'as
 a priority project throughout the
 intelligence and the defense research
 and development community. 13
 Chadwell also urged Smith co estab-
 lish an external research project of
 top-level scientists to study the prob-
 lem of UFOs .2' After this briefing,
 Smith directed DDI Amory co pre-
 pare a NSC Intelligence Directive
 (NSCID) for submission to the NSC
 on the need to continue the investiga-
 tion of UFOs and to coordinate such
 investigations with the Air Force."
 On 4 December 1952, the Intelli-
 gence Advisory Committee (IAC)
 took up the issue of UFOs.26 Amory,
 as acting chairman, presented DCI
 Smith's request to the committee
 that it informally discuss the subject
 of UFOs. Chadwell then briefly
 reviewed the situation and the active
 program of the ATIC relating to
 UFOs. The committee agreed that
 the DCI should "enlist the services'
 of selected scientists to review and
 appraise the available evidence in the
 light of pertinent scientific theories"
 and draft an NSCID on the
 subject.27 Maj. Gen. John A. Sam-
 ford, Director of Air Force
 Intelligence, offered full
 cooperation.28
 At the same time, Chadwell looked
 into British efforts in this area. He
 learned the British also were active in
 studying the UFO phenomena. An
 eminent British scientist, R. V. Jones,
 headed a standing committee created
 in June 1951 on flying saucers.
 Jones' and his committee's conclu-
 sions on UFOs were similar co chose
 of Agency officials: the sightings
 were not enemy aircraft but misrepre-
 sentations of natural phenomena.
 The British noted, however, that dur-
 ing a recent air show RAF pilots and
 senior military officials had observed
 a "perfect flying saucer." Given the
 press response, according to the
 officer, Jones was having a most diffi-
 cult time trying to correct public
 opinion regarding UFOs. The public
 was convinced they were real.29
 In January 1953, Chadwell and H. P.
 Robertson, a noted physicist from the
 California Institute of Technology,
 put together a distinguished panel of
 nonmilitary scientists to study the
 UFO issue. It included Robertson as
 C00242525
 chairman; Samuel A. Goudsmic, a
 nuclear physicist from the Brookhaven
 National Laboratories; Luis Alvarez, a
 high-energy physicist; Thornton Page,
 the deputy director of the Johns Hop-
 kins Operations Research Office and
 an expert on radar and electronics; and
 Lloyd Berkner, a director of the
 Brookhaven National Laboratories and
 a specialist in geophysics.'0
 The charge to the panel was to review
 the available evidence on UFOs and
 to consider the possible dangers-of the
 phenomena to US national security.
 The panel met from 14 to 17 January
 1953. It reviewed Air Force data on
 UFO case histories and, after spend-
 ing 12 hours studying the
 phenomena, declared that reasonable
 explanations could be suggested for
 most, if not all, sightings. For exam-
 ple, after reviewing motion-picture
 film taken of a UFO sighting near
 Tremoncon, Utah, on 2 July 1952
 and one near Great Falls, Montana,
 on 15 August 1950, the panel con-
 cluded that the images on the
 Tremoncon film were caused by sun-
 light reflecting off seagulls and that
 the images at Great Falls were sun-
 light reflecting off the surface of two
 Air Force interceptors.31
 The panel concluded unanimously
 that there was no evidence of a direct
 threat to national security in the UFO
 sightings. Nor could the panel find
 any evidence that the objects sighted
 might be extraterrestrials. It did find
 that continued emphasis on UFO
 reporting might threaten "the orderly
 functioning" of the government by
 clogging the channels of communica-
 tion with irrelevant reports and by
 inducing "hysterical mass behavior"
 harmful to constituted authority.
 The panel also worried that potential
 enemies contemplating an attack on
 the United States might exploit the
 UFO phenomena and use them to dis-
 rupt US air defenses. 31
 To meet these problems, the panel rec-
 ommended that the National Security
 Council debunk UFO reports and
 institute a policy of public education
 to reassure the public of the lack of
 evidence behind UFOs. It suggested
 using the mass media, advertising,
 business dubs, schools, and even the
 Disney corporation to get the message
 across. Reporting at the height of
 McCarthyism, the panel also recom-
 mended that such private UFO
 groups as the Civilian Flying Saucer
 Investigators in Los Angeles and the
 Aerial Phenomena Research Organiza-
 tion in Wisconsin be monitored for
 subversive activities.33
 The Robertson panel's conclusions
 were strikingly similar to chose of the
 earlier Air Force project reports on
 SIGN and GRUDGE and to those of
 the CIA's own OSI Study Group. All
 investigative groups found that UFO
 reports indicated no direct threat to
 national security and no evidence of
 visits by extraterrestrials.
 Following the Robertson panel find-
 ings, the Agency abandoned efforts to
 draft an NSCID on UFOs. 14 The Sci-
 entific Advisory Panel on UFOs (the
 Robertson panel) submitted its report
 to the IAC, the Secretary of Defense,
 the Director of the Federal Civil
 Defense Administration, and the
 Chairman of the National Security
 Resources Board. CIA officials said
 no further consideration of the sub-
 ject appeared warranted, although
 they continued to monitor sightings
 in the interest of national security.
 Philip Strong and Fred Durant from
 OSI also briefed the Office of
 National Estimates on the findings.35
 CIA officials wanted knowledge of
 any Agency interest in the subject of
 flying saucers carefully restricted, not-
 ing not only that the Robertson panel
 report was classified but also that any
 mention of CIA sponsorship of the
 panel was forbidden. This attitude
 would later cause the Agency major
 problems relating to its credibiliry.36
 The 1950s: Fading CIA Interest in
 UFOs
 After the report of the Robertson
 panel, Agency officials put the entire
 issue of UFOs on the back burner. In
 May 1953, Chadwell transferred chief
 responsibility for keeping abreast of
 UFOs co OSI's Physics and Electronic
 Division, while the Applied Science
 Division continued to provide any nec-
 essary support.37 Todos M. Odarenko,
 chief of the Physics and Electronics
 Division, did not want to cake on the
 problem, contending that it would
 require coo much of his division's ana-
 lytic and clerical time. Given the
 findings of the Robertson panel, he
 proposed to consider the project "inac-
 tive" and to devote only one analyst
 part-time and a file clerk to maintain a
 reference file of the activities of the Air
 Force and ocher agencies on UFOs.
 Neither the Navy nor the Army
 showed much interest in UFOs,
 according to Odarenko.31
 A nonbeliever in UFOs, Odarenko
 sought to have his division relieved of
 the responsibility for monitoring UFO
 reports. In 1955, for example, he rec-
 ommended that the entire project be
 terminated because no new informa-
 tion concerning UFOs had surfaced.
 Besides, he argued, his division wag fac-
 ing a serious budget reduction and
 could not spare the resources.39 Chad-
 well and other Agency officials,
 however, continued to worry about
 UFOs. Of special concern were over-
 seas reports of UFO sightings and
 000242525
 44
 claims that German engineers held by
 the Soviets were developing a "flying
 saucer" as a future weapon of war.40
 To most US political and military
 leaders, the Soviet Union by the mid-
 1950s had become a dangerous oppo-
 nent. Soviet progress in nuclear
 weapons and guided missiles was par-
 ticularly alarming. In the summer of
 1949, the USSR had detonated an
 atomic bomb. In August 1953, only
 nine months after the United Stares
 tested a hydrogen bomb, the Soviets
 detonated one. In the spring of
 1953, a cop secret RAND Corpora-
 tion study also pointed out the
 vulnerability of SAC bases to a sur-
 prise attack by Soviet long-range
 bombers. Concern over the danger
 of a Soviet attack on the United
 States continued to grow, and UFO
 sightings added co. the uneasiness of
 US policymakers.
 Mounting reports of UFOs over east-
 ern Europe and Afghanistan also
 prompted concern char the Soviets
 were making rapid progress in this
 area. CIA officials knew that the
 British and Canadians were already
 experimenting with "flying saucers."
 Project Y was a Canadian-British-US
 developmental operation to produce
 a nonconventional flying-saucer-type
 aircraft, and Agency officials feared
 the Soviets were resting similar
 devices."
 Adding to the concern was a flying
 saucer sighting by US Senator
 Richard Russell and his party while
 traveling on a train in the USSR in
 October 1955. After extensive inter-
 views of Russell and his group,
 however. CIA officials concluded
 that Russell's sighting did not sup-
 port the theory that the Soviets had
 developed saucerlike or unconven-
 tional aircraft. Herbert Scoville, Jr.,
 BLUE BOOK investigators
 were able to attribute many
 UFO sightings to U-2
 flights.
 11
 the Assistant Director of OSI, wrote
 char the objects observed probably
 were normal jet aircraft in a steep
 dimb.2
 Wilton E. Lexow, head of the CIA's
 Applied Sciences Division, was also
 skeptical. He questioned why the
 Soviets were continuing to develop
 conventional-type aircraft if they had
 a "flying saucer."43 Scoville asked
 Lexow to assume responsibility for
 fully assessing the capabilities and
 limitations of nonconvencional air-
 craft and to maintain the OSI central
 file on the subject of UFOs.
 In November 1954, CIA had entered
 into the world of high technology
 with its U-2 overhead reconnaissance
 project. Working with Lockheed's
 Advanced Development Facility in
 Burbank, California, known as the
 Skunk Works, and Kelly Johnson, an
 eminent aeronautical engineer, the
 Agency by August 1955 was testing a
 high-altitude experimental aircraft-
 the U-2. It could fly at 60,000 feet;
 in the mid-1950s, most commercial
 airliners flew between 10,000 feet
 and 20,000 feet. Consequently,
 once the U-2 started rest flights, com-
 mercial pilots and air traffic
 controllers began reporting a large
 increase in UFO sighcings.44 (U)
 The early U-2s were silver (they were
 later painted black) and reflected the
 rays from the sun, especially at sun-
 rise and sunset. They often appeared
 as fiery objects to observers below.
 Air Force BLUE BOOK investiga-
 tors aware of the secret U-2 flights
 cried to explain away such sightings
 by linking them to natural phenom-
 ena such as ice crystals and
 temperature inversions. By checking
 with the Agency's U-2 Project Staff
 in Washington, BLUE BOOK inves-
 tigators were able to attribute many
 UFO sightings to U-2 flights. They
 were careful, however, not to reveal
 the true cause of the sighting to the
 public.
 According to later estimates from
 CIA officials who worked on the U-
 2 project and the OXCART (SR-71,
 or Blackbird) project, over half of all
 UFO reports from the late 1950s
 through the 1960s were accounted
 for by manned reconnaissance flights
 (namely the U-2) over the United
 States.45 This led the Air Force to
 make misleading and deceptive .case-
 ments to the public in order to allay
 public fears and to protect an extraor-
 dinarily sensitive national security
 project. While perhaps justified, this
 deception added fuel to the later con-
 spiracy theories and the coverup
 controversy of the 1970s. The per-
 centage of what the Air Force
 considered unexplained UFO sight-
 ings fell to 5.9 percent in 1955 and
 to 4 percent in 1956.6
 At the same time, pressure was build-
 ing for the release of the Robertson
 panel report on UFOs. In 1956,
 Edward Ruppelt, former head of the
 Air Force BLUE BOOK project,
 publicly revealed the existence of the
 panel. A best-selling book by UFOI-
 ogist Donald Keyhoe, a retired
 Marine Corps major, advocated
 release of all government informa-
 tion relating to UFOs. Civilian
 UFO groups such as the National
 C00242525
 Investigations Committee on Aerial
 Phenomena (NICAP) and the Aerial
 Phenomena Research Organization
 (AFRO) immediately pushed for
 release of the Robertson panel
 report.47 Under pressure, the Air
 Force approached CIA for permission
 to declassify and release the report.
 Despite such pressure, Philip Strong,
 Deputy Assistant Director of OSI,
 refused to declassify the report and
 declined to disclose CIA sponsorship
 of the panel. As an alternative, the
 Agency prepared a sanitized version of
 the report which deleted any reference
 to CIA and avoided mention of any
 psychological warfare potential in the
 UFO controversy.4a
 The demands, however, for more gov-
 ernment information about UFOs did
 not let up. On 8 March 1958, Key-
 hoe, in an interview with Mike
 Wallace of CBS, claimed deep CIA
 involvement with UFOs and Agency
 sponsorship of the Robertson panel.
 This prompted a series of letters to
 the Agency from Keyhoe and Dr.
 Leon Davidson, a chemical engineer
 and UFOtogisc. They demanded the
 release of the full Robertson panel
 report and confirmation of CIA
 involvement in the UFO issue.
 Davidson had convinced himself that
 the Agency, not the Air Force, carried
 most of the responsibility for UFO
 analysis and that "the activities of the
 US Government arc responsible for
 the flying saucer sightings of the last
 decade." Indeed, because of the
 undisclosed U-2 and OXCART
 flights, Davidson was closer to the
 truth than he suspected. Cl, neverthe-
 less held firm to its policy of not
 revealing its role in UFO investiga-
 tions and refused to declassify the full
 Robertson panel report.49
 In a meeting with Air Force represenca-
 cives to discuss how to handle future
 inquires such as Keyhoe's and David-
 son's, Agency officials confirmed their
 opposition to the declassification of
 the full report and worried that Key-
 hoe had the ear of former DCI VAdm.
 Roscoe Hillenkoetcer, who served on
 the board of governors of NICAP.
 They debated whether to have CIA
 General Counsel Lawrence R. Hous-
 ton show Hillenkoetter the report as a
 possible way to defuse the situation.
 CIA officer Frank Chapin also hinted
 that Davidson might have ulterior
 motives, "some of them perhaps not
 in the best interest of this country,"
 and suggested bringing in the FBI to
 investigate.50 Although the record is
 unclear whether the FBI ever insti-
 tuted an investigation of Davidson or
 Kcyhoe, or whether Houston ever saw
 Hillenkoetter about the Robertson
 report, Hillenkoetcer did resign from
 the NICAP in 1962.51
 The Agency was also involved with
 Davidson and Keyhoe in two rather
 famous UFO cases in the 1950s,
 which helped contribute to a growing
 sense of public distrust of CIA with
 regard to UFOs. One focused on
 what was reported to have been a tape
 recording of a radio signal from a fly-
 ing saucer; the ocher on reported
 photographs of a flying saucer. The
 "radio code" incident began inno-
 cently enough in 1955, when two
 elderly sisters in Chicago, Mildred
 and Marie Maier, reported in the Jour-
 nal of Space Flight their experiences
 with UFOs, including the recording
 of a radio program in which an uni-
 dentified code was reportedly heard.
 The sisters taped the program and
 other ham radio operators also
 claimed to have heard the "space mes-
 sage." OSI became interested and
 asked the Scientific Contact Branch
 to obtain a copy of the recording. 5-
 Field officers from the Contact Divi-
 sion (CD), one of whom was Dewelt
 Walker, made contact with the Maier
 sisters, who were "thrilled that the
 government was interested," and set
 up a time to meet with them. 53 In try-
 ing to secure the tape recording, the
 Agency officers reported that they had
 stumbled upon a scene from Arsenic
 and Old Lace. "The only thing lack-
 ing was the elderberry wine," Walker
 cabled Headquarters. After reviewing
 the sisters' scrapbook of clippings
 from their days on the stage, the offic-
 ers secured a copy of the recording.54
 OSI analyzed the tape and found it
 was nothing more than Morse code
 from a US radio station.
 The matter rested there until
 UFOlogisc Leon Davidson talked
 with the Maier sisters in 1957. The
 sisters remembered they had talked
 with a Mr. Walker who said he was
 from the US Air Force. Davidson
 then wrote to a Mr. Walker, believing
 him to be a US Air Force Intelligence
 Officer from Wright-Patterson, to ask
 if the cape had been analyzed at
 ATIC. Dewelc. Walker replied to
 Davidson that the cape had been for-
 warded to proper authorities for
 evaluation, and no information was
 available concerning the results. Not
 satisfied, and suspecting that Walker
 was really a CIA officer, Davidson
 next wrote DCI Alen Dulles demand-
 ing to learn what the coded message
 revealed and who Mr. Walker was.55
 The Agency, wanting co keep
 Walker's identity as a CIA employee
 secret, replied that another agency of
 the government had analyzed the cape
 in question and that Davidson would
 be hearing from the Air Force. 56 On
 5 August, the Air Force wrote David-
 son saying that Walker "was and is an
 Air Force Officer" and that the tape
 .was analyzed by another government
 organization." The Air Force letter
 000242525
 44
 confirmed that the recording con-
 tained only identifiable Morse code
 which came from a known US-
 licensed radio station. 57
 Davidson wrote Dulles again. This
 time he wanted to know the identity
 of the Morse operator and of the
 agency that had conducted the analy-
 sis. CIA and the Air Force were now
 in a quandary. The Agency had pre-
 viously denied that it had actually
 analyzed the tape. The Air Force had
 also denied analyzing the tape and
 claimed that Walker was an Air Force
 officer. CIA officers, under cover,
 contacted Davidson in Chicago and
 promised to get the code translation
 and the identification of the transmit-
 ter, if possible."
 In another attempt to pacify David-
 son, a CIA officer, again under cover
 and wearing his Air Force uniform,
 contacted Davidson in New York
 City. The CIA officer explained that
 there was no super agency involved
 and that Air Force policy was not to
 disclose who was doing what. While
 seeming to accept this argument,
 Davidson nevertheless pressed for dis-
 closure of the recording message and
 the source. The officer agreed to see
 what he could do. 59 After checking
 with Headquarters, the CIA officer
 phoned Davidson to report char a
 thorough check had been made and,
 because the signal was of known US
 origin, the cape and the notes made
 at the time had been destroyed to
 conserve file space.G?
 Incensed over what he perceived was
 a runaround, Davidson cold the CIA
 officer that "he and his agency.
 whichever it was, were acting like
 Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamster
 Agency officials felt the
 need to keep informed on
 UFOs if only to alert the
 DCI to the more
 sensational UFO reports
 and flaps.
 99
 Union in destroying records which
 might indict chem."61 Believing that
 any more contact with Davidson
 would only encourage more specula-
 don, the Contact Division washed its
 hands of the issue by reporting to the
 DCI and to ATIC that it would not
 respond to or try to contact Davidson
 again.62 Thus, a minor, rather
 bizarre incident, handled poorly by
 both CIA and the Air Force, turned
 into a major flap that added fuel to
 the growing mystery surrounding
 UFOs and CIA's role in their
 investigation.
 Another minor flap a few months
 later added to the growing questions
 surrounding the Agency's true role
 with regard to flying saucers. CIA's
 concern over secrecy again made mat-
 ters worse. In 1958, Major Keyhoe
 charged that the Agency was deliber-
 ately asking eyewitnesses of UFOs
 not to make their sightings public.63
 The incident stemmed from a
 November 1957 request from OSI to
 the CD to obtain from Ralph C.
 Mayher, a photographer for KYW-
 TV in Cleveland, Ohio, certain pho-
 tographs he took in 1952 of an
 unidentified flying object. Harry
 Real, a CD.officer, contacted May-
 her and obtained copies of the
 photographs for analysis. On 12
 December 1957, John Hazen,
 another CD officer, returned the five
 photographs of the alleged UFO to
 Mayher without comment. Mayher
 asked Hazen for the Agency's evalua-
 Lion of the photos, explaining that he
 was trying to organize a TV program
 to brief the public on UFOs. He
 wanted to mention on the show chat
 a US intelligence organization had
 viewed the photographs and thought
 them of interest. Although he
 advised Mayher not to take this
 approach, Hazen stated that Mayhcr
 was a US citizen and would have to
 make his own decision as to what to
 do.64
 Keyhoe later contacted Mayher, who
 cold him his story of CIA and the
 photographs. Keyhoe then asked the
 Agency to confirm Hazen's employ-
 ment in writing, in an effort to
 expose CIA's role in UFO investiga-
 dons. The Agency refused, despite
 the fact that CD field representatives
 were normally overt and carried cre-
 dentials identifying their Agency
 association. DCI Dulles's aide, John
 S. Earman, merely sent Keyhoe 4'
 noncommittal letter noting that,
 because UFOs were of primary con-
 cern to the Department of the Air
 Force, the Agency had referred his
 letter to the Air Force for an appro-
 priate response. Like the response to
 Davidson, the Agency reply to Key-
 hoe only fueled the speculation that
 the Agency was deeply involved in
 UFO sightings. Pressure for release
 of CIA information on UFOs contin-
 ued to grow.65
 Although CIA had a declining inter-
 est in UFO cases, it continued to
 monitor UFO sightings. Agency offi-
 cials felt the need to keep informed
 on UFOs if only to alert the DCI to
 themorc sensational UFO reports
 and flaps."
 C00242525
 The 1960s: Declining CIA Involve-
 ment and Mounting Controversy
 In the early 1960s, Keyhoe, David-
 son, and other UFOlogisrs
 maintained their assault on the
 Agency for release of UFO informa-
 tion. Davidson now claimed that
 CIA "was solely responsible for creat-
 ing the Flying Saucer furor as a cool
 for cold war psychological warfare
 since 1951." Despite calls for Con-
 gressional hearings and the release of
 all materials relating to UFOs, little
 ehanged.67
 In 1964, however, following high-
 level White House discussions on
 what to do if an alien intelligence was
 discovered in space and a new out-
 break of UFO reports and sightings,
 DCI John McCone asked for an
 updated CIA evaluation of UFOs.
 Responding to McCone's request,
 OSI asked the CD to obtain various
 recent samples and reports of UFO
 sightings from NICAP. With Key-
 hoe, one of the founders, no longer
 active in the organization, CIA offic-
 ers met with Richard H. Hall, the
 acting director. Hall gave the officers
 samples from the NICAP database on
 the most recent sighcings.6e
 After OSI officers had reviewed the
 material, Donald F. Chamberlain,
 OSI Assistant Director, assured
 McCone that little had changed since
 the early 1950s. There was still no evi-
 dence that UFOs were a threat to the
 security of the United Stares or that
 they were of "foreign origin." Cham-
 berlain cold McCone that OSI still
 monitored UFO reports, including
 the official Air Force investigation,
 Project BLUE BOOK.69
 At the same time that CIA was con-
 ducting this latest internal review of
 UFOs, public pressure forced the Air
 Force to establish a special ad hoc
 committee to review BLUE BOOK
 Chaired by Dr. Brian O'Brien, a
 member of the Air Force Scientific
 Advisory Board, the panel included
 Carl Sagan, the famous astronomer
 from Cornell University. Its report
 offered nothing new. It declared that
 UFOs did not threaten the national
 security and that it could find "no
 UFO case which represented techno-
 logical or scientific advances outside
 of a terrestrial framework." The com-
 mittee did recommend that UFOs be
 studied intensively, with a leading uni-
 versity acting as a coordinator for the
 project, to settle the issue
 conclusively.70
 The House Armed Services Commit-
 tee also held brief hearings on UFOs
 in 1966 that produced similar results.
 Secretary of the Air Force Harold
 Brown assured the committee that
 most sightings were easily explained
 and that there was no evidence that
 "strangers from outer space" had been
 visiting Earth. He told the committee
 members, however, that the Air Force
 would keep an open mind and con-
 tinue to investigate all UFO reports."
 Following the report of its O'Brien
 Committee, the House hearings on
 UFOs, and Dr. Robertson's disclosure
 on a CBS Reports program that CIA
 indeed had been involved in UFO
 analysis, the Air Force in July 1966
 again approached the Agency for
 declassification of the entire Robert-
 son panel report of 1953 and the full
 Durant report on the Robertson panel
 deliberations and findings. The
 Agency again refused to budge. Karl
 H. Weber, Deputy Director of OSI,
 wrote the Air Force that "We are
 most anxious that further publicity
 not be given to the information that
 the panel was sponsored by the CIA."
 Weber noted that there was already a
 sanitized version available to the
 public.72 Weber's response was rather
 shortsighted and ill considered. It
 only drew more attention to the 13-
 year-old Robertson panel report and
 CIA's role in the investigation of
 UFOs. The science editor of The Sat-
 urday Review drew nationwide
 attention to the CIA's role in investi-
 gating UFOs when he published an
 article criticizing the "sanitized ver-
 sion" of the 1953 Robertson panel
 report and called for release of the
 entire documenc.73
 Unknown to CIA officials, Dr. James
 E. McDonald, a noted atmospheric
 physicist from the University ofAri-
 zona, had already seen the Durant
 report on the Robertson panel pro-
 ceedings at Wright-Patterson on 6
 June 1966. When McDonald
 returned to Wright-Patterson on 30
 June to copy the report, however, the
 Air Force refused to icc him see is
 again, stating that it was a GIA classi-
 fied document. Emerging as a UFO
 authority, McDonald publicly
 claimed that the CIA was behind the
 Air Force secrecy policies and
 coverup. He demanded the release of
 the full Robertson panel report and
 the Durant rcport.74
 Bowing to public pressure and the rec-
 ommendation of its own O'Brien
 Committee, the Air Force announced
 in August 1966 that is was seeking a
 contract with a leading university to
 undertake a program of intensive
 investigations of UFO sightings. The
 new program was designed to blunt
 continuing charges that the US Gov-
 ernment had concealed what is knew
 about UFOs. On 7 October, the Uni-
 versity of Colorado accepted a
 $325,000 contract with the Air Force
 for an 18-month study of flying sau-
 cers. Dr. Edward U. Condon, a
 physicist at Colorado and a former
 C00242525
 44
 Director of the National Bureau of
 Standards, agreed to head the pro-
 gram. Pronouncing himself an
 "agnostic" on the subject of UFOs,
 Condon observed that he had an
 open mind on the question and
 thought that possible extraterritorial
 origins were "improbable but not
 impossible."73 Brig. Gen. Edward
 Giller, USAF, and Dr. Thomas
 Ratchford from the Air Force
 Research and Development Office
 became the Air Force coordinators
 for the project.
 In February 1967, Giller contacted
 Arthur C. Lundahl, Director of
 CIA's National Photographic Inter-
 pretation Center (NPIC), and
 proposed an informal liaison through
 which NPIC could provide the Con-
 don Committee with technical
 advice and services in examining pho-
 tographs of alleged UFOs. Lundahl
 and DDI R. Jack Smith approved
 the arrangement as a way of "preserv-
 ing a window" on the new effort.
 They wanted the CIA and NPIC to
 maintain a low profile, however, and
 to take no part in writing any conclu-
 sions for the committee. No work
 done for the committee by NPIC
 was to be formally acknowledged. 76
 Ratchford next requested that Con-
 don and his committee be allowed to
 visit NPIC to discuss the technical
 aspects of the problem and to view
 the special equipment NPIC had for
 photoanalysis. On 20 February 1967,
 Condon and four members of his
 committee visited NPIC. Lundahl
 emphasized to the group that any
 NPIC work to assist the committee
 must not be identified as CIA work.
 Moreover, work performed by NPIC
 would be strictly of a technical
 nature. After receiving these guide-
 lines, the group heard a series of
 briefings on the services and equip-
 Additional sightings in the
 early 1970s also fueled
 beliefs that the CIA was
 somehow involved in a vast
 conspiracy.
 11
 merit not available elsewhere that CIA
 had used in its analysis of some UFO
 photography furnished by Ratchford.
 Condon and his committee were
 impressed.77
 Condon and the same group met
 again in May 1967 at NPIC to hear
 an analysis of UFO photographs
 taken at Zanesville, Ohio. The analy-
 sis debunked that sighting. The
 committee was again impressed with
 the technical work performed, and
 Condon remarked that for the first
 time a scientific analysis of a UFO
 would stand up to investigation.-8
 The group also discussed the com-
 mittee's plans to call on US citizens
 for additional photographs and to
 issue guidelines for taking useful
 UFO photographs. In addition, CIA
 officials agreed that the Condon
 Committee could release the full
 Durant report with only minor
 deletions.
 In April 1969, Condon and his com-
 mittee released their report on
 UFOs. The report concluded that
 little, if anything, had come from the
 study of UFOs in the past 21 years
 and that further extensive study of
 UFO sightings was unwarranted. It
 also recommended char the Air Force
 special unit, Project BLUE BOOK,'
 be discontinued. It did not mention
 CIA participation in the Condon
 committee's investigation. 79 A spe-
 cial panel established by the National
 Academy of Sciences reviewed the
 Condon report and concurred with
 its conclusion that "no high priority
 in UFO investigations is warranted
 by data of the past two decades." It
 concluded its review by declaring,
 "On the basis of present knowledge,
 the least likely explanation of UFOs
 is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial
 visitations by intelligent beings."
 Following the recommendations of
 the Condon Committee and the
 National Academy of Sciences, the
 Secretary of the Air Force, Robert C.
 Seamans, Jr., announced on 17
 December 1969 the termination of
 BLUE BOOK.80
 The 1970s and 1980s: The UFO
 Issue Refuses To Die
 The Condon report did nor satisfy
 many UFOlogists, who considered it
 a coverup for CIA activities in UFO
 research. Additional sightings in the
 early 1970s fueled beliefs that the
 CIA was somehow involved in a vast
 conspiracy. On 7 June 1975, Will-
 iam Spaulding, head of a small UFO
 group, Ground Saucer Watch
 (GSW), wrote to CIA requesting a
 copy of the Robertson panel report
 and all records relating to UFOs.e'
 Spaulding was convinced that the
 Agency was withholding major files
 on UFOs. Agency officials provided
 Spaulding with a copy of the Robert-
 son panel report and of the Durant
 report.82
 On 14 July 1975, Spaulding again
 wrote the Agency questioning the
 authenticity of the reports he had
 received and alleging a CIA coverup
 of its UFO activities. Gene Wilson,
 CIA's Information and Privacy
 Coordinator, replied in an attempt
 to satisfy Spaulding, "At no time
 prior to the formation of the Robert-
 son Panel and subsequent to the
 issuance of the panel's report has CIA
 engaged in the study of the UFO phe-
 C00242525
 nomena." The Robertson panel
 report, according to Wilson, was "the
 summation of Agency interest and
 involvement in UFOs." Wilson also
 inferred that there were no additional
 documents in CIA's possession that
 related to UFOs. Wilson was ill
 informed.83
 In September 1977, Spaulding and
 GSW, unconvinced by Wilson's
 response, filed a Freedom of Informa-
 tion Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the
 Agency that specifically requested all
 UFO documents in CIA's possession.
 Deluged by similar FOIA requests for
 Agency information on UFOs, CIA
 officials agreed, after much legal
 maneuvering, to conduct a "reason-
 able search" of CIA files for UFO
 tnaterials.?M Despite anAgency-wide
 unsympathetic attitude coward the
 suit, Agency officials, led by Launie
 Ziebell from the Office of General
 Counsel, conducted a thorough
 search for records pertaining to
 UFOs. Persistent, demanding, and
 even threatening at times, Ziebell and
 his group scoured the Agency. They
 even turned up an old UFO file
 under a secretary's desk. The search
 finally produced 355 documents total-
 ing approximately 900 pages. On 14
 December 1978, the Agency released
 all but 57 documents of about 100
 pages to GSW. It withheld these 57
 documents on national security
 grounds and to protect sources and
 methods."
 Although the released documents pro-
 duced no smoking gun and revealed
 only a low-level Agency interest in the
 UFO phenomena after the Robertson
 panel report of 1953, the press treated
 the release in a sensational manner.
 The New York Times, for example,
 claimed that the declassified docu-
 ments confirmed intensive
 government concern over UFOs and
 that the Agency was secretly involved
 in the surveillance of UFOs.86 GSW
 then sued for the release of the with-
 held documents, claiming that the
 Agency was still holding out key
 information.87 It was much like the
 John F. Kennedy assassination issue.
 No matter how much material the
 Agency released and no matter how
 dull and prosaic the information, peo-
 ple continued to believe in a Agency
 coverup and conspiracy.
 DCI Stanfield Turner was so upset
 when he read The New York Times
 article that he asked his senior offic-
 ers, "Are we in UFOs?" After
 reviewing the records, Don Wortman,
 Deputy Director for Administration,
 reported to Turner that there was "no
 organized Agency effort to do research
 in connection with UFO phenomena
 nor has there been an organized effort
 to collect intelligence on UFOs since
 the 1950s." Worcman assured Turner
 that the Agency records held only
 "sporadic instances of correspondence
 dealing with the subject," including
 various kinds of reports of UFO sight-
 ings. There was no Agency program
 to collect actively information on
 UFOs, and the material released to
 GSW had few deletions.83 Thus
 assured, Turner had the General
 Counsel press for a summary judg-
 ment against the new lawsuit by
 GSW. In May 1980, the courts dis-
 missed the lawsuit, finding that the
 Agency had conducted a thorough
 and adequate search in good faith.89
 During the lace 1970s and 1980s, the
 Agency continued its low-key interest
 in UFOs and UFO sightings. While
 most scientists now dismissed flying
 saucers reports as a quaint part of the
 1950s and 1960s, some in the
 Agency and in the Intelligence Com-
 munity shifted their interest to
 studying parapsychology and psychic
 phenomena associated with UFO
 sightings. CIA officials also looked at
 the UFO problem to determine what
 UFO sightings might tell them about
 Soviet progress in rockets and
 missiles and reviewed its counterintel-
 ligence aspects. Agency analysts from
 the Life Science Division of OSI and
 OSWR officially devoted a small
 amount of their time to issues relat-
 ing to UFOs. These included
 counterintelligence concerns that the
 Soviets and the KGB were using US
 citizens and UFO groups to obtain
 information on sensitive US weapons
 development programs (such as the
 Stealth aircraft), the vulnerability of
 the US air-defense network to pene-
 tration by foreign missiles mimicking
 UFOs, and evidence of Soviet
 advanced technology associated with
 UFO sightings.
 CIA also maintained' Intelligence
 Community coordination with ocher
 agencies regarding their work in para-
 psychology, psychic phenomena, and
 "remote viewing" experiments. In
 general, the Agency took a conserva-
 tive scientific view of these
 unconventional scientific issues.
 There was no formal or official UFO
 project within the Agency in the
 1980s, and Agency officials purposely
 kept files on UFOs to a minimum to
 avoid creating records that might mis-
 lead the public if released.90
 The 1980s also produced renewed
 charges that the Agency was still with-
 holding documents relating to the
 1947 Roswell incident, in which a
 flying saucer supposedly crashed in
 New Mexico, and the surfacing of doc-
 uments which purportedly revealed
 the existence of a top secret US
 research and development intelligence
 78
 000242525
 44
 operation responsible only to the  -
 President on UFOs in the lace 1940s
 and early 1950s. UFOlogiscs had
 long argued that, following a flying
 saucer crash in New Mexico in 1947,
 the government not only recovered
 debris from the crashed saucer but
 also four or five alien bodies. Accord-
 ing to some UFOlogists, the
 government clamped tight security
 around the project and has refused to
 divulge its investigation results and
 research ever since.91 In September
 1994, the US Air Force released a
 new report on the Roswell incident
 chat concluded that the debris found
 in New Mexico in 1947 probably
 came from a once top secret balloon
 operation, Project MOGUL,
 designed to monitor the atmosphere
 for evidence of Soviet nuclear tesrs.92
 Circa 1984, a series of documents
 surfaced which some UFOlogists said
 proved that President Truman cre-
 aced a cop secret committee in 1947,
 Majestic-12, to secure the recovery of
 UFO wreckage from Roswell and
 any other UFO crash sight for scien-
 tific study and to examine any alien
 bodies recovered from such sites.
 Most if not all of these documents
 have proved to be fabrications. Yet
 the controversy persists."
 Like the JFK assassination conspiracy
 theories, the UFO issue probably
 will not go away soon, no matter
 what the Agency does or says. The
 belief char we are not alone in the
 universe is coo emotionally appealing
 and the distrust of our government is
 too pervasive to make the issue ame-
 nable to traditional scientific studies
 of rational explanation and evidence.
 Like the JFK assassination
 conspiracy theories, the
 UFO issue probably will
 not go away soon, no
 matter what the Agency
 does or says.
 .>
 1. See the 1973 Gallup Poll results
 printed in The New York Timer, 29
 November 1973, p. 45 and Philip J.
 Klass, UFOs: The Public Deceived
 (New York: Prometheus Books,
 1983),0.3.
 2. See Klass, UFOs, p. 3; James S. Gor-
 don, "The UFO Experience," Atlantic
 Monrhly (August 199 1.). pp. 82-92;
 David Michael Jacobs, The UFO Con-
 troversy in America (Bloomington:
 Indiana University Press, 1975);
 Howard Blum, Out There: The Gov-
 ern ment's Secret Quest for
 Exrrarerresniab (New York: Simon
 and Schuster, 1990); Timothy Good,
 Above Top Secret: The Worldwide
 UFO Cover-Up (New York: William
 Morrow, 1987); and Whitley Strieber,
 Communion: The True Story (New
 York: Morrow, 1987).
 3. In September 1993 John Peterson, an
 acquaintance of Woolsey s, first
 approached the DCI with a package
 of heavily sanitized CIA material on
 UFOs released to UFOlogisc Stanton.
 T. Friedman. Peterson and Friedman
 wanted to know the reasons for the
 redactions. Woolsey agreed to look
 into the matter. See Richard J. War-
 shaw, Executive Assistant, note co
 author, 1 November 1994; Warshaw,
 note to John H. Wright, Information
 and Privacy Coordinator, 31 January
 1994; and Wright, memorandum to
 Executive Secretariat, 2 March 1994.
 (Except where noted, all citations to
 CIA records in this article are to the
 records collected for the 1994 Agency-
 wide search that are held by the Execu-
 tive Assistant to the DCI).
 4. See Hector Quintanilla, Jr., "The
 Investigation of UFOs," Vol. 10, No.
 4, Studies in Inrt!ligenee (fall 1966):
 pp.95-110 and CIA. unsigned memo-
 randum, "Flying Saucers," 14 August
 1952. See also Good, Above Top
 Secret, p. 253. During World War II,
 US pilots reported "foo fighters"
 (bright lights trailing US aircraft).
 Fearing they might be Japanese or
 German secret weapons. OSS investi-
 gated but could find no concrete
 evidence of enemy weapons and often
 filed such reports in the "crackpot"
 category. The OSS also investigated
 possible sightings of German V 1 and
 V-2 rockets before their operational
 use during the war. See Jacobs, UFO
 Controversy, p. 33. The Central Intel-
 ligence Group, the predecessor of the
 CIA, also monitored reports of "ghost
 rockets" in Sweden in 1946. See
 GIG, Intelligence Report, 9 April
 1947.
 5. Jacobs, The UFO Controversy. p. 156
 and Quintanilla. "The Investigation
 of UFOs," p. 97.
 6. See US Air Force, Air Material Com-
 mand, "Unidentified Aerial Objects:
 Project SIGN, no. F-TR 2274, IA,
 February 1949, Records of the US Air
 Force Commands, Activities and
 Organizations, Record Group 341,
 National Archives, Washington, DC.
 7. See US Air Force. Projects GRUDGE
 and BLUEBOOKReporrs 1- 12 (Wash-
 ington, DC; National Investigations
 Committee on Aerial Phenomena,
 1968) and Jacobs, The UFO Contro-
 versy, pp. 50-54.
 8. See Cabell, memorandum to Com-
 manding Generals Major Air
 Commands, "Reporting of Informa-
 tion on Unconventional Aircraft," 8
 September 1950 and Jacobs, The
 UFO Controversy, p. 65.
 9. See Air Force, Projects GRUDGE and
 BLUE BOOKand Jacobs, The UFO
 Controversy, p. 67.
 C00242525
 10. (S) See Edward Tauss, memorandum
 for Deputy Assistant Director, SI,
 "Flying Saucers," 1 August 1952. See
 also United Kingdom, Report by the
 "Flying Saucer" Working Parry, "Uni-
 dencified Flying Objects," no date
 (approximately 1950).
 it. See Dr. Scone, OSI, memorandum to
 Dr. Willard Machle, OSI, 15 March
 1949 and Ralph L Clark, Acting
 Assistant Director, OSI. memoran-
 dum for DDI, "Recent Sightings of
 Unexplained Objects," 29 July 1952.
 12. Scone, memorandum to Machle. See
 also Clark, memorandum for DDI,
 29 July 1952.
 13. See Klass, UFOs, p. 15. For a brief
 review of the Washington sightings see
 Good, Above Top Secret, pp. 269-271.
 14. See Ralph L. Clark, Acting Assistant
 Director, OSI. memorandum to DDI
 Robert Amory, Jr.. 29 July 1952.
 OSI and OCI were in the Directorate
 of Intelligence. Established in 1948,
 OSI served as the CIA's focal point
 for the analysis of foreign scientific
 and technological developments. In
 1980, OSI was merged into the Office
 of Science and Weapons Research.
 The Office of Current Intelligence
 (OCI), established on 15 January
 1951 was to provide all-source current
 intelligence to the President and the
 National Security Council.
 15. Tauss. memorandum for Deputy
 Assistant Director, Sl (Philip Strong),
 1 August 1952.
 16. On 2 January 1952, DCI Walter
 Bedell Smith created a Deputy Direc-
 torate for Intelligence (DDI) composed
 of six overt CIA organizations-OSI,
 OCI. Office of Collection and Dissemi-
 nation. Office National Estimates,
 Office of Research and Reports, and
 the Office of Intelligence Coordina-
 tion-to produce intelligence analysis
 for US policymakers.
 17. See Minutes of Branch Chiefs Meet-
 ing. I l August 1952.
 18. Smith expressed his opinions at a
 meeting in the DCI Conference
 Room attended by his top officers.
 See Deputy Chief, Requirements
 Staff. FI, memorandum for Deputy
 Director, Plans, "Flying Saucers," 20
 August 1952, Directorate of Opera-
 tions Records, Information
 Management Staff, Job 86-00538R,
 Box 1. (S)
 19. Sec CIA memorandum, unsigned,
 "Flying Saucers," 11 August 1952.
 20. See CIA, memorandum, unsigned,
 "Flying Saucers," 14 August 1952.
 21. See CIA. memorandum, unsigned,
 "Flying Saucers," 19 August 1952.
 22. See Chadwell, memorandum for
 Smith, 17 September 1952 and 24
 September 1952, "Flying Saucers."
 See also Chadwell, memorandum for
 DCI Smith, 2 October 1952 and
 Klass, UFOs, pp. 23-26.
 23. Chadwell, memorandum for DCI
 with attachments, 2 December 1552.
 See also Klass, UFOr, pp. 26-27 and
 Chadwell, memorandum, 25 Novem-
 ber 1952.
 24. See Chadwell, memorandum, 25
 November 1952 and Chadwell, mem-
 orandum, "Approval in Principle -
 External Research Project Concerned
 with Unidentified Flying Objects," no
 date. See also Philip G. Strong, OSI,
 memorandum for the record, "Meet-
 ing with Dr. Julius A. Stratton,
 Executive Vice President and Provost,
 MIT and Dr. Max Millikan, Director
 of CENIS." Strong believed that in
 order to undertake such a review they
 would need the full backing and sup-
 port of DCI Smith.
 25. See Chadwell, memorandum for
 DCI, " Unidentified Flying Objects."
 2 December 1952. See also Chad-
 well, memorandum for Amory. DDI,
 "Approval in Principle - External
 Research Project Concerned with Uni-
 dentified Flying Objects," no date.
 26. The IAC was created in 1947 to serve
 as a coordinating body in establishing
 intelligence requirements. Chaired by
 the DCI, the LAC included representa-
 tives from the Department of State,
 the Army, the Air Force, the Joint
 Chiefs of Staff, the FBI, and the AEC.
 27. See Klass, UFOs, p. 27.
 28. See Richard D. Drain, Acting Secs
 ary, IAC, "Minutes of Meeting held
 in Director's Conference Room,
 Administration Building, CIA," 4
 December 1952.
 29. (S) See Chadwell, memorandum for
 the record, "British Activity in the
 Field of UFOs," 18 December 1952.
 30. See Chadwell, memorandum for
 DCI, "Consultants for Advisory Panel
 on Unidentified Flying Objects," 9
 January 1953; Curtis Peebles, Watch
 the Skies'A Chronicle of the Flying Sau-
 cer Myth (Washington, DC:
 Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994).
 pp. 73-90; and Jacobs, The UFO Con-
 troversy. pp. 91-92.
 31. See Fred C. Durant III, Report on the
 Robertson Panel Meeting, January
 1953. Durant, on contract with OSI
 and a past president of the American
 Rocket Society, attended the Robert-
 son panel meetings and wrote a
 summary of the proceedings.
 32. See Report of the Scientific Panel on
 Unidentified Flying Objects (the Rob-
 ertson Report), 17 January 1953 and
 the Durant report on the panel
 discussions.
 33. See Robertson Report and Durant
 Report. See also Good, Above Top
 Secret, pp. 337-38, Jacobs, The UFO
 Controversy, p. 95, and Klass, UFO
 pp. 28-29.
 34. See Reber, memorandum to IAC, 18
 February 1953.
 35. See Chadwell, memorandum for
 DDI, "Unidentified Flying Objects,"
 80                                                                                                             }
 000242525
 10 February 1953; Chadwdl, letter to
 Robertson, 28 January 1953; and
 Reber, memorandum for IAC, "Uni-
 dentified Flying Objects," 18
 February 1953. On briefing the
 ONE, see Durant, memorandum for
 the record, "Briefing of ONE Board
 on Unidentified Flying Objects." 30
 January 1953 and CIA Summary dis-
 seminated to the field, "Unidentified
 Flying Objects," 6 February 1953.
 36. See Chadwell, letter to Julius A. Stray
 con, Provost MIT, 27 January 1953.
 37. See Chadwell, memorandum for
 Chief, Physics and Electronics Divi- -
 sion/OSI (Todos M. Odarenko),
 "Unidentified Flying Objects," 27
 May 1953.
 38. See Odarenko, memorandum to
 Chadwell, "Unidentified Flying
 Objects," 3 July 1953. See also
 Odarenko, memorandum to Chad-
 well, "Current Status of Unidentified
 Flying Objects (UFOB) Project," 17
 December 1953.
 39. See Odarenko, memorandum, "Uni-
 dentified Flying Objects," 8 August
 1955.
 40. See FBIS, report, "Military Unconven-
 tional Aircraft," 18 August 1953 and
 various reports, "Military-Air, Uncon-
 ventional Aircraft," 1953. 1954, 1955.
 Baku," 13 October 1955; Scoville,
 memorandum for the record, "Inter-
 view with Senator Richard B. Russell."
 27 October 1955; and Wilton E.
 Lexow, memorandum for information,
 "Reported Sighting of Unconventional
 Aircraft," 19 October 1955.
 43. See Lexow, memorandum for informa-
 tion, "Reported Sighting of
 Unconventional Aircraft," 19 October
 1955. See also Frank C. Bolser, mem-
 orandum for George C. Miller,
 Deputy Chief, SAD/SI, "Possible
 Soviet Flying Saucers, Check On;"
 Lexow, memorandum, "Possible
 Soviet Flying Saucers, Follow Up
 On." 17 December 1954; Lexow,
 memorandum, "Possible Soviet Flying
 Saucers," i December 1954; and A.
 H. Sullivan, Jr., memorandum, "Possi-
 ble Soviet Flying Saucers," 24
 November 1954.
 44. See Gregory W. Pedlow and Donald
 E. Welzenbach, The Centrallntelli-
 gence Agency and Overhead
 Reconnaissance. The U-2 and
 OXCARTPrograms. 1954-1974
 (Washington, DC: CIA History Staff,
 1992), pp. 72-73.
 45. See Pedlow and Welzenbach, Over-
 head Reconnaissance, pp. 72-73. This
 also was confirmed in a telephone
 interview between the author and
 John Parongosky, 26 July 1994.
 Parongosky oversaw the day-to-day
 affairs of the OXCART program.
 Strong, memorandum for Major James
 F. Byrne, Assistant Chief of Staff, Intel-
 ligence Department of the Air Force,
 "Declassification of the `Report of the
 Scientific Panel on Unidentified Flying
 Objects,'" 20 December 1957. See
 also Berkner, letter to Strong, 20
 November 1957 and Page, letter to
 Strong, 4 December 1957. The panel
 members were also reluctant to have
 their association with the Agency
 released.
 49. Sec Wilton E. Lexow, memorandum
 for the record. "Comments on Letters
 Dealing with Unidentified Flying
 Objects," 4 April 1958; J. S. Earman,
 letter to Major Lawrence J. Tacker,
 Office of the Secretary of the Air
 Force, Information Service, 4 April
 1958; Davidson, letter to Berkner, 8
 April 1958; Berkner, letter to David-
 son, 18 April 1958; Bcrkner, letter to
 Strong, 21 April 1958; Davidson, let-
 ter to Tacker. 27 April 1958;
 Davidson, letter to Allen Dulles, 27
 April 1958; Ruppelc, letter to David-
 son, 7 May 1958; Strong, letter to
 Berkner, 8 May 1958; Davidson, let-
 ter to Berkncr, 8 May 1958;  -
 Davidson, letter to Earman. 16 May
 1958; Davidson, letter to Goudsmic,
 18 May 1958; Davidson, letter to
 Page, 18 May 1958; and Tacker, let-
 rer to Davidson, 20 May 1958.
 50. See Lexow, memorandum for
 Chapin, 28 July 1958.
 41. Developed by the Canadian affiliate
 of Britain's A. V. Roe, Ltd., Project Y
 did produce a small-scale model chat
 hovered a few feet off the ground. See
 Odarenko, memorandum to Chad-
 well, "Flying Saucer Type of Planes"
 25 May 1954; Frederic C. E. Oder,
 memorandum to Odarenko, "USAF
 Project Y," 21 May 1954; and
 Odarenko, T. M. Nordbeck, Ops/SI,
 and Sidney Graybeal, ASD/SI, memo-
 randum for the record, "Intelligence
 Responsibilities for Non-Conven-
 tional Types of Air Vehicles," 14 June
 1954.
 42. See Reuben Efron, memorandum.
 "Observation of Flying Object Near
 46. See Jacobs, The UFO Controversy,
 p. 135.
 47. See Peebles, Watch the Skies, pp. 128-
 146; Ruppelt, The Report on Unidenti-
 fied Flying Objects (New York.
 Doubleday, 1956); Keyhoc, The Fly-
 ing Saucer Conspiracy (New York:
 Holt, 1955); and Jacobs, The UFO
 Controversy. pp. 347-49.
 48. See Strong, letter to Lloyd W. Berkner;
 Strong, letter to Thorcon Page; Strong,
 letter to Robertson; Strong, letter to
 Samuel Goudsmic; Strong, letter to
 Luis Alvarez, 20 December 1957; and
 51. See Good, Above Top Secret, pp. 346-
 47; Lexow, memorandum for the
 record, "Meeting with the Air Force
 Personnel Concerning Scientific Advi-
 sory Panel Report on Unidentified
 Flying Objects, dared 17 January
 1953 (S)," 16 May 1958. See also La
 Rae L. Teel. Deputy Division Chief,
 ASD, memorandum for the record,
 "Meeting with Mr. Chapin on Reply-
 ing to Leon Davidson's UFO Letter
 and Subsequent Telephone Conversa-
 tion with Major Thacker, [sic)" 22
 May 1958.
 52. See Edwin M. Ashcrafc, Chief,
 Contact Division (Scientific), memo-
 C00242525
 randum to Chief, Chicago Office,
 memorandum for Austin Bricker, Jr.,
 See also F. J. Sheridan, Chief, Wash-
 "Radio Code Recording," 4 March
 Assistant to the Director, "Inquiry by
 ington Office, memorandum to
 1955 and Ashcroft, memorandum to
 Major Donald E. Keyhoc on John
 Chief, Contact Division, "National
 Chief, Support Branch, OSI, 17
 Hawn's Association with the
 Investigation Committee on Aerial
 March 1955.
 Agency." 22 January 1959.
 Phenomena (NICAP)," 25-January
 53. The Contact Division was created to
 collect foreign intelligence informa-
 tion from sources within the United
 States. Sec the Directorate of Intelli-
 gence Historical Series, The Origin
 and Development of Contact Division,
 11 July 1946-1 July 1965 (Washing-
 ton, DC; CIA Historical Staff, June
 1969).
 54. See George O. Forrest, Chief, Chi-
 cago Office, memorandum to Chief,
 Contact Division for Science, I 1
 March 1955.
 64. Sec John T. Hawn, memorandum to
 Chief. Contact Division, 12 Decem-
 ber 1957. See also Ashcrafr,
 memorandum to Cleveland Resident
 Agent. "Ralph E. Mayher." 20 Decem-
 ber 1957. According to this
 memorandum, the photographs were
 viewed at "a high level and returned
 to us without comment." The Air
 Force held the original negatives. The
 CIA records were probably destroyed.
 65. The issue would resurface in the
 1970a with the GSW FOIA court case.
 1965.
 69. Chamberlain, memorandum for DCI,
 "Evaluation of UFOs," 26 January
 1965.
 70. See Jacobs, The UFO Controvmy, p.
 199 and US Air Force, Scientific Advi-
 sory Board, Ad Hoc Committee
 (O'Brien Committee) to Review
 Project BLUE BOOK, Special Reporr
 (Washington, DC: 1966). Sec also
 The New York rimes, 14 August
 1966, p. 70.
 55. See Support Division (Connell), mem-
 orandum to Dewelc E. Walker, 25
 April 1957.
 56. See J. Arnold Shaw, Assistant to the
 Director, letter to Davidson, 10 May
 1957.
 57. See Support (Connell) memorandum
 to Lt. Col. V. Skakich, 27 August 1957
 and Lamountain, memorandum to
 Support (Connell), 20 December 1957.
 58. See Lamountain, cable to Support
 (Connell), 31 July 1958.
 59. See Support (Connell) cable to Skak-
 ich, 3 October 1957 and Skakich,
 cable to Connell, 9 October 1957.
 60. See Skakich, cable to Connell, 9 Octo-
 ber 1957.
 61. See R. P. B. Lohmann, memorandum
 for Chief, Contact Division, DO, 9
 January 1958.
 62. See Support, cable to Skakich, 20 Feb-
 ruary 1958 and Connell (Support)
 cable to Lamountain, 19 December
 1957.
 63. See Edwin M. Ashcraft, Chief, Con-
 tact Division, Office of Operations,
 66. See Robert Amory. Jr., DDI, memo-
 randrun for Assistant Director/
 Scientific Intelligence, "Flying Sau-
 cers," 26 March 1956. Sec also
 Wallace R. Lamphire, Office of the
 Director, Planning and Coordination
 Staff memorandum for Richard M.
 Bissell, Jr.. ."Unidentified Flying Sau-
 cers (UFO)," l1 June 1957; Philip
 Strong, memorandum for the Direc-
 tor, NPIC, "Reported Photography of
 Unidentified Flying Objects," 27
 October 1958; Scoville, memorandum
 to Lawrence Houston, Legislative
 Counsel. "Reply to Honorable Joseph
 E. (:artli." 12 July 1961; and Hous-
 ton. letter to Garth, 13 July 1961.
 67. See. Iiir example, Davidson, letter to
 Congressman Joseph Garth, 26 June
 1961 and Carl Vinson, Chairman,
 House Committee on Armed Ser-
 vices. letter to Rep. Robert A. Everett,
 2 Selueniber 1964.
 68. See Maxwell W. Hunter, staff mem-
 ber. National Aeronautics and Space
 Council. Executive Office of the Presi-
 dent. memorandum for Robert F.
 Parkard. Office of International Scien-
 tific Afflirs, Department of Scacc.
 "Thoughts on the Space Alien Race
 Question." 18 July 1963, File SP 16.
 Records of the Department of State,
 Record Croup 59. National Archives.
 71. See "Congress Reassured on Space Vis-
 its," The New York Times, 6 April
 1966.
 72. Weber, letter to Col. Gerald E. Jor-
 gensen, Chief, Community Relations
 Division, Office of Information, US
 Air Force, 15 August 1966. 11 e
 Durant report was a detailed summary
 of the Robertson panel proceedings.
 73. See John Lear, "The Disputed CIA
 Document an UFOs," Saturday
 Review (September 3, 1966), p. 45.
 The Lear article was otherwise unsym-
 pathetic to UFO sightings and the
 possibility that extraterritorials were
 involved. The Air Force had been
 eager to provide Lear with the full
 report. See Walter L. Mackey, Execu-
 tive Officer, memorandum for DCI,
 "Air Force Request to Declassify CIA
 Material on Unidentified Flying
 Objects (UFO)," 1 September 1966.
 74. See Klass, UFOs, p. 40, Jacobs, The
 UFO Controversy, p. 214 and Everec
 Clark, "Physicist Scores 'Saucer Sta-
 tus,'" The New York Times, 21
 October 1966. See also James E.
 McDonald, "Statement on Unidenti-
 fied Flying Objects," submitted to the
 House Committee on Science and
 Astronautics, 29 July 1968.
 82
 C00242525
 75. Condon is quoted in Walter Sullivan,
 "3 Aides Selected in Saucer Inquiry,"
 The New York Times, 8 October
 1966. See also "An Outspoken Scien-
 cisc, Edward Uhler Condon," The
 New York Times, 8 October 1966.
 Condon, an outgoing, gruff scientist,
 had earlier become embroiled in a con-
 troversy with the House Unamerican
 Activities Committee that claimed
 Condon was "one of the weakest links
 in our atomic security." See also Pee-
 bles. Watch the Skies, pp. 169-195.
 76. See Lundahl, memorandum for DDI,
 7.February 1967.
 77. See memorandum for the record,
 "Visit of Dr. Condon to NPIC, 20
 February 1967," 23 February 1967.
 See also the analysis of the photo-
 graphs in memorandum for Lundahl,
 "Photo Analysis of UFO Photogra-
 phy," 17 February 1967.
 78. See memorandum for the record,
 "UFO Briefing for Dr. Edward Con-
 don, 5 May 1967," 8 May 1967 and
 attached "Guidelines to UFO Photog-
 raphers and UFO Photographic
 Information Sheet." See also Condon
 Committee, Press Release, I May
 been withheld from the documents.
 See Klass, UFOs, p. 6.
 81. GSW was a small group of UFO buffs
 based in Phoenix, Arizona, and
 headed by William H. Spaulding.
 82. Sec Klass, UFO:, p. 8.
 83. See Wilson, letter to Spaulding, 26
 March 1976 and GSW v. CIA Civil
 Action Case 78-859.
 84. GSW v. CIA Civil Action Case 78-
 859, p. 2.
 85. Author interview with Launie Zicbell,
 23 June 1994 and author interview
 with OSI analyst, 21 July 1994. See
 also affidavits of George Owens, CIA
 Information and Privacy Act Coordi-
 nator; Karl H. Weber, OSI; Sidney D.
 Stembridge, Office of Security; and
 Rutledge P. Hazzard, DS&T; GSW v.
 CIA Civil Action Case 78-859 and
 Sayre Stevens, Deputy Director for
 National Foreign Assessment, memo-
 randum for Thomas H. White,
 Assistant for Information, Informa-
 tion Review Committee, "FOIA
 Litigation Ground Saucer Watch," no
 dace.
 90. (S) See John Brennan, memorandum
 for Richard Warshaw, Executive Assis-
 tanc, DCI, "Requested Information
 on UFOs," 30 September 1993;
 Author interviews with OSWR ana-
 lyst, 14 June 1994 and OSI analyst,
 21 July 1994. This author found
 almost no documentation on Agency
 involvement with UFOs in the 1980s.
 There is a DIA Psychic Center and the
 NSA studies parapsychology, that
 branch of psychology that deals with
 the investigation of such psychic phe-
 nomena as clairvoyance, extrasensory
 perception, and telepathy. The CIA
 reportedly is also a member of an Inci-
 dent Response Team to investigate
 UFO landings, if one should occur.
 This team has never met. The lack of
 solid CIA documentation on Agency
 UFO-related activities in the 1980s
 leaves the entire issue somewhat
 murky for this period.
 Much of the UFO literature presently
 focuses on concactees and abductees.
 See John E. Mack, Abduction, Human
 Encounters with Aliens (New Yo&
 Charles Scribner's Sons, 1994) and
 Howard Blum, Out There (New York:
 Simon and Schuster, 1990).
 1967 and Klass, UFOr, p. 41. The
 Zaneville photographs turned out to
 86. See "CIA Papers Detail UFO Surveil-
 91. See Charles Berlitz and William L.
 be a hoax.
 lance." The New York Times, 13
 Moore, The Roswell Incident (New
 January 1979; Patrick Huyghe. "UFO
 York: Berkeley Books, 1988); Moore,
 79. See Edward U. Condon, Scientific
 Files: The Untold Story," The New
 "The Roswell Incident: New Evidence
 Study of Unidentified Flying Objects
 York Timer Magazine, 14 October
 in the Search for a Crashed UFO
 "
 (New York: Bantam Books, 1969)
 1979, p. 106; and Jerome Clark,
 ,
 (Burbank
 California: Fair Witness
 and Klass, UFOs. p. 41. The report
 "UFO Update," UFO Report, August.
 ,
 1982)
 Publication Number
 Project
 contained the Durant report with
 1979.
 ,
 ,
 1201; and Klass, UFOs, pp. 280-281.
 only minor deletions.
 In 1994 Congressman Steven H.
 87. Jerome Clark, "Latest UFO News
 Schiff (R-NM) called for an official
 80. See Office of Assistant Secretary of
 Briefs From Around the World,"
 study of the Roswell incident. The
 Defense, News Release
 "Air Force to
 UFO Update, August 1979 and GSW
 GAO is conducting a separate investi-
 ,
 Terminate Project BLUEBOOK," 17
 v. CIA Civil Action No. 78-859.
 gation of the incident. The CIA is
 December 1969. The Air Force
 not involved in the investigation. See
 retired BLUEBOOK records to the
 88. See Worcman, memorandum for DCI
 Klass, UFOs, pp. 279-281; John H.
 USAF Archives at Maxwell Air Force
 Turner, "Your Question, 'Are we in
 Wright, Information and Privacy
 Base in Alabama. In 1976 the.Air
 UFOs?' Annotated to The New York
 Coordinator, letter to Derek Skrcen,
 Force turned over all BLUEBOOK
 Times News Release Article," 18 Janu-
 20 September 1993; and OSWR ana-
 files to the National Archives and
 ary 1979.
 lyst interview. See also the made-for-
 Records Administration, which made
 TV film, Roswell which appeared on
 them available to the public without
 89. See GSW v. CIA Civil Action 78-
 cable TV on 31 July 1994 and Pce-
 major restrictions. Some names have
 859. See also Klass, UFOr, pp. 10-12.
 bles, Watch the Skies, pp. 245-25 i.
 000242525
 1:11
 UFOs
 it
 92. See John Diamond, "Air Force Probes
 1947 UFO Claim Findings Are
 Down to Earth," 9 September 1994,
 Associated Press release; William J.
 Broad, 'Wreckage of a'Spaceship': Of
 This Earth (and U.S.)," The New York
 Times, 18 September 1994, p. 1; and
 USAF Col. Richard L Weaver and
 1st Lc. James McAndrew, The Roswell
 Report, Fact Versus Fiction in New
 Mexico Desert (Washington, DC:
 GPO, 1995).
 93. See Good, Above Top Secret, Moore
 and S. T. Friedman, "Philip Klass and
 MJ-12: What are the Facts," (Bur-
 bank California: Fair-Witness Project,
 1988), Publication Number 1290;
 Klass, "New Evidence of MJ-12
 Hoax," Skeptical Inquirer, vol. 14
 (Winter 1990); and Moore and Jaime
 H. Shandera, The MI-12 Documents:
 An Analytical Report (Burbank, Cali-
 fornia: Fair-Witness Project, 1990),
 Publication Number 1500. Walter
 Bedell Smith supposedly replaced For-
 rescal on 1 August 1950 following
 Forrestal's death. All members listed
 were deceased when the MJ- 12 "docu-
 ments" surfaced in 1984. See Peebles,
 Watch the Skies, pp. 258-268.
 Dr. Larry Bland, editor of The George
 C Marshall Papers, discovered that one
 of the so-called Majestic- 12 docu-
 ments was a complete fraud. It
 contained the exact same language as a
 letter from Marshall to Presidential
 candidate Thomas Dewey regarding
 the "Magic" intercepts in 1944. The
 dates and names had been altered and
 "Magic" changed to "Majie." More-
 over, it was a photocopy, not an
 original. No original MJ-12 docu-
 ments have ever surfaced. Telephone
 conversation between the author and
 Bland, 29 August 1994.
 84

