(1) Denial to ufologists of the government’s offensive and defensive weapons capabilities;
(2) Denial to ufologists of the government’s intelligence-gathering capabilities and level of analysis; and
(3) Prevention of direct or indirect Psychological Warfare effect. Are these measures justifiable?
In the balance are our rights as U.S. citizens versus the degradation of America’s national security caused by the release of the UFO information. With this in mind, let’s review the three criteria in detail.
Item (1) is fairly obvious. If a potential enemy learns our weapons technology, he can develop countermeasures. This, in turn, would render the weapons system useless, and make us vulnerable to attack. So the answer is a clear and resounding “No!” to release.
Item (2) is the reverse side of the item (1). We are gathering information in order to make the enemy’s weapons ineffective. Here is a purely hypothetical example. Suppose we are successful through FOIA, or through what you must admit amounts to standard espionage techniques which we call “UFO research,” and discover that the government has photos of a UFO hovering above a submarine.
Moreover, the information we have obtained tells us that the submarine is at a depth of 50 fathoms. We also get pictures taken at 100 and 200 fathoms, and quickly publish all the facts. The Soviet submarine commanders would get the message at once the U.S. anti-submarine surveillance technology is only capable of imaging down to 200 fathoms. So they would design attack strategies in which they would cruise without worry at depths below that level. Bad news for our side and it puts ufologists on the wrong end of the logic of item (2).
Item (3) is by far the most complex issue. Psychological Warfare is accomplished by two main methods. First, direct aggressive efforts aimed at the enemy, and second, indirect damage caused by the release of information regarding the enemy’s capabilities and intentions. The purpose of “Psy War” is to erode the will of the enemy nation, and it can have a devastating impact on military effectiveness. A battle lost in the mind usually translates directly to military defeat. But the effects of Psy-War go beyond military targets.
Both government and private institutions can be severely damaged. An example is the stock market crash which took place just before the Gulf War. This is minor compared with the psychological shock waves that would be produced by release of certain UFO information. In fact, the harm would almost certainly be unprecedented in terms of damage levels, with major impact on basic religious and economic institutions The major methods employed by UFO counterintelligence are debunking and misinformation.
Debunking can be as simple as using the technique of over-simplification of
analysis. For example, the time-honored quick answer to a UFO sighting, such
as “weather balloon,” or “swamp gas.” Disinformation, however,
should be our main area of concern. It uses a technique known in the trade as
“plausible denial.” One way to view this is that the information is
2% truth and 98% nonsense, of some mixture of the two, but never the whole truth.
It must appear legitimate on the surface, but have enough bunk in it to send
you off in a totally wrong direction. By far the most powerful weapon in the
ufo counter-intelligence arsenal is the ufologists themselves.
A former CI officer once remarked to me about a prominent New York City ufologist,
“If he didn’t exist, we’d have to invent him.” There is nothing that
counterintelligence operators appreciate more than a gullible ufologist i.e.
born again lesbian lizards from Antares, seven-foot alien cockroaches with hyperactive
libidos, etc. The result is that the credibility of the entire UFO research
community is debased. Little wonder that the press treats the subject as a joke.
That’s what the CI people work so hard to accomplish. The “aliens are eating
us” crowd is the answer to the CI prayers. This brings us to the question
of whether the government is justified in witholding certain information from
the public based in its psychological impact alone. The first NSC meeting was
held in September, 1947. One of the main topics is rumored to have been the
retrieval of a crashed alien aircraft at Roswell. We might know if this rumor
is true, but the minutes of that meeting have been removed by the CIA from the
National Archives. Interestingly, they were removed in February, 1979.
This is when intelligence operatives discovered that a book telling the truth
about the Roswell crash was about to be published. It then became necessary
to clean up the “paper trail,” among other CI moves to protect the
Roswell secret. The NSC had to consider the Roswell UFO crash only eight years
after the Orson Welles “War of the Worlds” broadcast, in which panic
ensued when the public thought Martians were invading. Little wonder that President
Truman kept mum. Was this a sound policy? I believe it was in 1947, and on through
to today. At least in the sense that the public was not ready for the stunning
revelation of aliens in our midst. But the public will never be ready! Nor is
there any way to prepare the public.
Therefore, further concealment is futile, as well as morallyun justifiable. In terms of national security, when a government is forced to treat its own populace as an enemy, then that government is already defeated and has lost its right to exist. Abductees are the only directly affected portion of the population. Granted, it is a very tiny fraction. But have we decided to write them off, to list them as an acceptable loss in this shadowy but nevertheless very real War of the Worlds? In closing, I wish to express my sympathy for those in government who are faced with these terrible decisions. I know you desire to do the right thing. To my colleagues in ufology, my advice is: be very careful what you ask for, because sometimes your wishes are granted. If your fervent wishes are granted, our whole civilization will suddenly have a new, revolutionary set of ideas about who and what we are. Can you take responsibility for the cataclysm?
Although I have used the term “threat” in this discussion, it should be obvious that if the aliens are truly hostile, we would have learned that it was a very, very hard way long ago. That there are great changes in store for mankind is certain. How we as a people handle those changes will determine the level of loss to our social and spiritual realities. There is much to lose but equally as much to gain. Or, as the alien may have said, “Lose a planet, gain a galaxy.”
Think about it.