The three U.S. Congressional UAP hearings

Hearings

There have now been three hearings before sub-committees of the U.S. Congress, regarding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP.) The purpose of this article is to provide concise information about each hearing, together with links to the relevant video and written transcript, which will allow the reader direct access to the content of each hearing. It appears that there will be further UAP related hearings in the near future. 

17 May 2022 "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena."

Committee: House Permanent Select Committe on Intelligence.

Sub-Committee: Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, and Counter Proliferation.

Chair: Rep. Andre Carson.

Biography | Congressman Andre Carson (house.gov)

Witnesses: Scott Bray, Deputy Director of Navy Intelligence, ONI.

                  Ronald Moultrie, Under Secretary of Defense (Intelligence and Security.)

Link to video:

Link to transcript:

What was the emphasis of the hearing? Chairman Carson stated:

"This hearing and oversight work has a simple idea at its core. Unidentified Aerial Phenomena are a potential national security threat, and they need to be treated that way. For too long the stigma associated with UAPs has gotten in the way of good intelligence analysis. Pilots avoided reporting or were laughed at when they did. DOD officials relegated the issue to the back room or swept it under the rug fearful of a skeptical national security community. Today we know better. UIAPs are unexplained, it is true, but they are real. They need to be investigated and any threats they pose need to be mitigated."

19 April 2023 "Hearing on the mission, activities, oversight and budget of the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office."

Committee: Senate Armed Services Committee.

Sub-Committee: Emerging Threats and Capabilities.

Chair: Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

Homepage - Kirsten Gillibrand | U.S. Senator for New York (senate.gov)

Witness: Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, Director of AARO.

Link to video:

Link to transcript:

What was the intention of this hearing? Senator Gillibrand stated:

"In this hearing I intend to probe a series of specific issues and the recent incidents where multiple objects were shot down over North America. It seems that Pentagon leadership did not turn to AARO office...and we need to know what role AARO will play in inter agency coordination after the NSC Working Group disbands...Finally, one of the tasks Congress set for AARO was serving as an open door for witnesses of UAP events, or participants in government activities related to UAPs to come forward..."

 

26 July 2023 "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security,  Public Safety and Government Transparency.

Committee: Committee on Oversight and Accountability.

Sub-committee: National Security, the Border and Foreign Affairs.

Chair: Rep. Glenn Grothman. 

U.S. Representative Glenn Grothman (house.gov)

Witnesses: 

David Grusch, former National Reconnaissance Office representative on the UAP Task Force, Department of Defense. Opening statement.

David Fravor, Retired Commander, Black Aces Squadron, US Navy. Opening statement. 

Ryan Graves, Executive Director, Americans for Safe Aerospace, former US Navy pilot. Opening statement. 

Link to video:

What was the aim of this hearing?  

"The sub-committee hearing will explore firsthand accounts of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) and assess the federal government's transparency and accountability regarding UAP's possible threats to U.S. national security. This hearing will also highlight legislative efforts to bring transparency to UAPs and require the federal government to provide the American people with information about potential risks to public safety and national security."

Robert Bigelow was looking for a second sponsor for the BAASS/AAWSAP

Introduction

Long-term readers of this blog will be aware that most of my blog articles are based on what interests me, rather than what is currently popular on Twitter, YouTube or other social media platforms. Like most UAP researchers and commentators, I have been following with great interest, the David Grusch story and the efforts of the US Congress.

However, you can read about these topics on multiple media outlets, including, increasingly, mainstream media. So, I don't feel a need to report them here too. Having said that, I continue to mine small pieces of information, from Jacques Vallee's book "Forbidden Science: Volume 5." Today, I learnt about the involvement of a Canadian engineer in the AAWSAP. I was surprised to learn of his role, as I have never read or heard anything about his work for AAWSAP. A second surprise item was that Bigelow was looking for another sponsor for BAASS/AAWSAP above and beyond the Defense Intelligence Agency. Who was that potential co-sponsor? Here are the relevant extracts from FS5.

30 September 2008

Scientific Research & Development Laboratory by Toronto Int. Airport (hathawayresearch.com)

Speaking of Robert Bigelow's BAASS/AAWSAP, Vallee wrote: 

"I do hope to find out more from George Hathaway what the prospects are for a more consistent plan when I meet him in Toronto on Monday."

Comment: 

I wrote a blog article about Canadian engineer George Hathaway, his work and research findings, back in 2018.  At one stage, in 1989, Hathaway was employed by Crown Prince Hans-Adam von Liechtenstein, and they were looking at the UAP with a view to discovering new forms of energy production. Hathaway was also the author of two of the 38 Defense Intelligence Reference Documents prepared for AAWSAP at the request of AAWSAP sub-contractors Hal Puthoff and Eric Davis. In addition, Hathaway Research International had conducted research on at least three occasions between 1992 and 2012 on UAP for unnamed clients, including field work in the US. 

6 October 2008

Shortly after the date upon which Robert Bigelow announced that he had launched a project which turned out to be AAWSAP, funded by the Defense Intelligence Agency, there appeared a diary entry dated 6 October 2008 when Vallee was in Toronto, Canada.

"George Hathaway is in his fifties. He looks like my brother, a cordial fellow with a moustache and a black leather jacket, a keen sense of humor and a quick mind. A father with two daughters in their 30's, he is an engineer, not a physicist, he insists; he just 'gets the equations from Puthoff and works with them.' He kindly picked me up from the airport and took me to dinner at Canoe's a trendy place high on a skyscraper from which we could see the lights of Toronto.

He has been working for his current sponsors since 1979. In 1988 they 'rescued' Hal from the bureaucracy by co-funding his fledgling research Institute, but I told George I thought we couldn't assume the physical answers tend to fit general relativity. Some interesting startups in my backyard and elsewhere were testing radically different formulations of mass and inertia. Hal is quite aware of this.

The main topic of the evening was the BAASS project and we were immediately on the same level, sharing plans but also concerns. Why wasn't there an organizing meetings that could have drawn on the lessons from the shortcomings of NIDS? Why the contradictions between the plan to contact other nations to share data and the expectation of privileged information from Washington? Why the speculation about potential disclosure when a legal decision exists, precluding us from such disclosure?

George, who isn't a US Citizen, isn't fully briefed but he knows that Bob Bigelow wanted a European sponsor to get involved, hence the trip with Hal and Kit, although that eminent contact isn't officially supposed to know the sponsor (as if he couldn't find out with two phone calls). That channel can open doors and the world, so George encouraged me to go and discuss the subject in Europe..."

Comment: 

So, Robert Bigelow wanted a European co-sponsor for his BAASS/AAWSAP. Who could it be? There may be a clue in Vallee's use of the word "eminent." Eminent (of a person) means famous and respected in a particular sphere. Also, when Vallee wrote "...as if he couldn't find out..." note the use of the pronoun "he," meaning a single male. 

23 November 2008

Vallee travels to Zurich, Switzerland. 

Comment: 

Switzerland is adjacent to the country of Liechtenstein. So, I suspect that one possibility for Bigelow's European co-sponsor would be Hans-Adam.; an eminent individual, with previous links to George Hathaway; and in fact, to Vallee, who had met Hans-Adam some years previously to discuss their respective research. 

24 November 2008

On a train from Zurich.

"Our meeting with our potential co-sponsors was relaxed. They were urbane and simple. We sat by the fireplace in a vast office, while they apologized for the lingering smell of a wood fire.

My appeal for help in reaching cabinet-level people who might have access to the real files in Europe had little result; however, they found closed doors everywhere, so my initial reality-check of Bigelow's plane led to a negative conclusion. They made it clear that few people in political office would take the initiative of opening the real data unless there was a clear, open signal from the United States, which has a history of carelessly exposing its friends..."

Comment:

 Vallee mentions the pronoun "they," i.e. more than one, which doesn't rule out the presence of Hans-Adam.  

24 December 2008

A conversation between Jacques Valle and Hal Puthoff.

"He told me his first job had consisted of putting together a program plan, timeline and list of collaborators. That had taken 45 days with Eric and George Hathaway..."

16 May 2009

"Hal shares my frustration about the lack of data from Skinwalker Ranch, where we'd proposed installing instruments from George Hathaway, like those already used at Chaco Canyon."

What was the outcome?

Vallee's book doesn't again mention BAASS European sponsors. In addition, I have never read, or heard, anything, anywhere else which reported on such actual co-sponsors. Naturally, I'd be interested to hear from any blog reader who may have further information. 

Zodiac

Introduction

From time to time, someone will bring up the topic of "Zodiac." By this, they mean either "Zodiac" is one name for the MJ-12 cover-up group, or "Zodiac" is the name of a crashed UAP retrieval program. Bits of information are scattered in a number of places, so I thought it would be useful to bring together the threads of information which I have come across while researching "Zodiac."

1998 UFO Magazine

Sedge-Masters.pdf (richarddolanmembers.com)

An intriguing article appeared in the May/June 1998 (Vol.13 No.3) issue of "UFO Magazine." Titled, "Deep files Trans "X" Communique:Letter to a UFO Recruit," it is attributed to "Greg Halifax." The editor of the magazine prefaced the article with the following:

"What you're about to read is largely unverified...But that doesn't mean it's not true. It's the type of UFO information that will typically be deeply buried, then carefully studied and compartmentalized by a small faction within the intelligence community, as suits any sensitive black operation. As such straightforward corroboration is difficult at best. But UFO Magazine has the advantage of more than a decade's worth of collected bits of information and broad-based facts on which to construct some fair extrapolations, drawn from a range of sources. The following incident reflects upon one of the blackest of American covert operations - that deals directly with the UFO phenomenon."

The article

The article relates that a character called "Sedge Masters" who was recruited by the CIA and briefed on an assignment at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. The briefing letter spoke of two craft recovered at Roswell in 1947, with both deceased and live beings.

The then President of the USA ordered the formation of a special group, Majestic-12 or MJ-12 for short. However, for most of the time, the code name assigned to the group and program was "Zodiac." 

"As of the early 1980's, the Agency exercised complete control over Zodiac...From 1947 to the early 1980's Zodiac recovered eleven other alien craft...Some craft were turned over to our government by friendly powers, most notably Denmark...There were ongoing efforts to discover the technological secrets of the recovered craft and to reverse engineer them or their subsystems, but so far these efforts have met with limited success...By the late 1960's Zodiac has been able to recruit members of an elite recovery team sixty seven well trained men...You have been selected to be part of a newly formed debriefing team..."

That then is a summary of the article. The article carried a note by the magazine- a short bio of the author Greg Halifax. "A writer-researcher for over 20 years, Greg Halifax lives in southern California."

Next issue

The September (Vol. 13 No.5) 1998 issue of "UFO Magazine" carried on the Sedge Masters story and how he debriefed people on the recovery team who had all lost one and a half hours during the recovery operation. A note at the end of this article read:

"A writer-researcher for over 20 years Greg Halifax lives in southern California. He has a  number of good friends in the military-industrial complex."

Third issue

Volume 13 Number 8 of "UFO Magazine," dated December 1998 sees Masters briefing his boss on Masters' findings. Here we read of UFO sightings by two men, Mike Castillon and Bob Earnest, who, inter alia, had reported a "large USO (underwater submerged object) off the coast of Palos Verdes near Catalina Island." Masters and a female psychologist interviewed the two men. There is a separate story of two other men, who in August 1971, and named John Hodges and Peter Rodriguez, reported seeing two "brains" in the middle of the road ahead of them.

Sedge Masters is later shown an object; "a "Piloted craft;" at WPAFB. A recovered craft from around 1972 found in the US Midwest. He then was shown a larger "ovoid disc..." recovered off the coast of Denmark.

Well, so goes the articles in "UFO Magazine." No one in the then UFO community appeared to take any notice of the articles, and so the story seemed to die, in late 1998. 

1999

However, someone, namely Hal Puthoff had taken notice, but we didn't learn this until the release of an internal NIDS memo in 2019.

A memorandum dated 23 March 2001 from Dr Eric W. Davis to Bob Bigelow, contained a copy of an email thread. One of these emails, dated 31 July 1999 was from Puthoff to Kit Green and his partner Kristin Zimmerman. It read:

"Just wanted to check. Didn't I send you as pkg of UFO Magazine articles by pseudonymous (sp?) author "Sedge Masters" concerning crash retrievals by a group called Zodiac. If so, still hoping for a readout by you on this, as we have reason to believe the set of articles (3, I think) are only slightly fictionzlized versions of a source's experience writing up records for the archives at WPAFB, specifically ever heard of Zodiac, which is supposed to be a true name?"

There is nor record of a response in the email thread.

2000/2001

Jacques Vallee's book "Fordbidden Science: Volume 5" throws more light on Zodiac. 

FS5 page 28 22 March 2000

"Eric has spoken recently openly at CIPA about NIDS and his efforts to track down a woman who'd worked at TRW in Roswell days and might be able to confirm UFO crash data."

Notes:

1. CIPA is short for California institute of Physics and Astrophysics.

2. NIDS is short for the National Institute for Discovery Science. 

3. Northrop-Grumman owns the old TRW as at this date.

FS5 page 35 8 May 2000

A conversation between Hal Puthoff, Dr. Eric W. Davis and Jacques Vallee.

"The first topic concerned the revelation of a former TRW employee. An attorney friend of hers has gathered her testimony. She was part of a secret reverse-engineering project called Zodiac. Eric has compiled his own file, but it doesn't lead to the verifiable, hard facts we need."

FS5 page 77 3 March 2001

Meeting of nine people at Joe Firmage's place.

"Eric Davis retold the story of Zodiac, which involves real people like Jerry Rosenberg, currently at IDA and Dale Graf, who was part of the remote viewing experiments at Wright-Patterson. Eric has been told there are ten Velobind volumes at Wright-Pat with Roswell data concerning the two crashed 'Mantra Ray' shaped craft, recovered bodies, foil-type material, and a special study by TRW."

2002

In 2019 two documents emerged, from former astronaut Edgar Mitchell's estate, namely, the previously mentioned Davis 2001 memorandum, and a document, dated 16 October 2002, which came to be known as the Wilson/Davis notes. Amongst the notes we find a reference to:

"EWD...Told Wilson about Mary Elizabeth Elliot - TRW story.

TW: Feedback - Mary Elliot sounds like real deal based on her info and behavior with attorney (Jeffrey W. Griffith.)

- Probably will only come totally clean on her deathbed 30 years from now."

2020/2021

On 21 November 2020, US researcher Richard Dolan ran an article about "Zodiac" on his website. 

On 5 August 2021, US researcher James Iandoli interviewed Richard Dolan for Iandoli's "Engaging the Phenomenon" podcast. Below are some of the points made about Zodiac.

* During a Dolan/Elizondo podcast - when asked about Zodica Elizondo replied along the lines of I can't talk about that

* Dolan says Zodiac is roughly equivalent to MJ-12 ie a coverup group

* The 2001 memo with email thread was said by both Davis and Green, to be genuine

* The three articles were written as fiction

* When asked by Iandoli who Greg Halifx was, Dolan said I think I know, not 100% sure. People who try to contact him just get the phone hung up on them. He's quite old now. He was "almost certainly a corporate attorney for TRW." Definitely in aerospace

* Dolan - I suspect he spent some time in Halfax Canada

* On the USO mentioned - The late Ann Druffel apparently investigated that particular case and wrote up her findings for MUFON J Dolan expressed his belief that "the author Greg Halifax as either a direct witness to that particular UFO event, or very, very close to a woman whose name is listed in the Wilson notes who might have been the direct witness"

* The author has been interested in UFOs since his sighting in  the 70's

* There was no follow up to the three articles

* Zodiac - "Even off the record I have not gotten, I must stress this, any, any kind of concrete meaningful admission as to what it is"

* The Majestic documents, as opposed to the original MJ-12 documents, were obtained from  Timothy Cooper

* Dolan - I don't think there is a reference to Zodiac in the Majestic documents.

important_memo.pdf (majesticdocuments.com)

Note: In fact there is one mention. In a seven-page letter, dated 7 July 1999, and sent to Timothy Cooper, an anonymous author, speaking about the cover up group, writes:

"The group has been called by many names. The most recent one was used in 1992 and was identified by the name JEHOVAH. At one time it was called ZODIAC and may have changed in 1995."

* Dolan "It's frustrating, honestly, after all this time. None of this proves that ther's a real Zodiac program and we just have to honestly state that"

* Dolan "I don't have proof that Zodiac is a real thing. I mean what you have is a lot of smoke that looks like there's a fire...and you do have, there are definitely people who believe like, people with more infor mation than you and I have who believe its real. That to me is totally clear'

2023

The topic of Zodiac continues to interest a number of people. There were threads of discussions on Reddit One Reddit thread included a link to a video about David Grusch. Among the comments about the video was one which purportedly came from a "Current Aerospace Engineer for the USAF" who commented "...this retrieval program is REAL and the most highly classified program in the US. The program is called ZODIAC."

Comments:

1. If one pieces together all the mentions of Eric Davis' work on Zodiac, it appears to reveal that a woman named Mary Elizabeth Elliot told her story to attorney Jeffrey W. Griffith. Elliot worked for TRW Inc. an American company which was involved, at various times, in electronics and aerospace. The account appears to have centered around the 1947 Roswell crash incident.

2. Dolan states that he believes "Greg Halifax" to have been a corporate attorney for TRW. This ties in with Davis' research. 

3. There is currently an attorney by the name of Jeffrey W. Griffith in California, born in 1950.  In his bio appears the statement that "He served as corporate counsel for the Hughes Aircraft Company and general counsel for another corporation headquartered in southern California." To my knowledge he has never acknowledged being an attorney for Mary Elizabeth Elliot and has never stated that he was the author "Greg Halifax."  

4. What about Mary Elizabeth Elliot? One Twitter user @inf3rence believed she had found the real Mary Elizabeth Elliot. Included in one of Joe Murgia's tweets about Zodiac was a video by @inf3rence giving her reasons why she thought she had found the real Mary Elizabeth Elliot by following the footsteps of a woman named Mary Ann Elliot who was in aerospace. However, to my knowledge no one has ever physically located and interviewed Mary Elizabeth Elliot. 

5. All in all, we still have no definitive proof that there was an entity named "Zodiac" - either as a cover-up group or as a crash retrieval program. I come back to Vallee's 8 May 2000 statement:

 "Eric has complied his own file, but it doesn't lead to the verifiable, hard facts we need."

Acknowledgement:

I would like to thank Welsh researcher Jonathan Davies for sharing his knowledge about "Zodiac" and for some stimulating discussions on the topic. 

Update: I had incorrectly spelled Eliot's name with two t's. I have corrected this. 

Vallee's "Forbidden Science: Volume 5" - items re the DIA and BAASS

I am continuing my re-reading of Jacques Vallee's book "Forbidden Science: Volume 5" and find small items of information which I have not read about anywhere else. They may well be small items of limited interest to others, but I document them here for future reference.

Item 1: A DIA UFO Collection Project?

Vallee, in a diary entry dated 26 March 2004, speaking of Dr. Eric W. Davis writes:

"Eric developed other sources, notably a former DIA senior officer who confirmed that DIA had a UFO collection project at one time. He promised to provide more information but died before they could meet again. His secretary found an envelope inside his desk sealed and addressed to Eric. It contained the man's notes about the project, and the real source of the fake MJ-12papers, with which the field of ufology remains fascinated. The story I was told is this: In 1961 the UFO Project inside the government, was taken over by DIA. By the early 1980's Rear Admiral E. A. Burkhalter, Jr. who was Chief of Staff and acting assistant vice director in the Directorate for Collection Management and his deputy Col. Roy K. Jonkers, USAF, were in charge of the project. They are shown in these positions on an org chart dated March 1981. The same document shows Dr. Jack Vorona as assistant vice-director for Scientific and Technical intelligence.

Burkhalter, calling himself 'Mister X' and a man named Polko, introduced as 'Falcon' decided to spread disinformation about UFOs. Apparently, Dale Graff, who monitored Hal's project on behalf of DIA, wasn't in the know. The remake of the Sandler-Emenegger documentary in which I participated was he correct platform, with the Norton episode, but when Pentagon P.R. man Colonel Coleman told us to 'go out on a limb' to draw out controversial revelations, I fortunately convinced Hynek we shouldn't take the bait.

After I had derailed the first effort to turn us into 'useful idiots,' Rear Admiral Burkhalter and Polko contacted Bill Moore and Linda Howe, and reportedly spread their 'revelations' through a frequently used disinformation channel.

By then the MJ-12 documents had been re-purposed as 'genuine' false documents, based on details that came from old Eagleton's (Sic Angleton?) disinformation files at CIA, and ufologists the world over swallowed the bait. So, everything now ties together. I still fail to see the ultimate point of such shenanigans however."

Item 2: The process by which the AAWSAP contract with the DIA was handled

We know for a fact that the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the DIA's contract for the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) was issued by the DIA on 18 August 2008. I was the first researcher who found the RFP on the Internet. The RFP had a response date of 5 September 2008. We also know for a fact that the successful bidder for the contract was Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS.) However, there has always been a debate as to how BAASS became the successful bidder. Some people suggest that the process was set up to ensure only BAASS would be successful. Information in FS5 may assist answer this question.

On page 425 of FS5 in a diary entry dated 23 August 2008, Vallee recounts a conversation with Hal Puthoff and points out that the RFP:

 "...is a 'set aside for small business' (eliminating Boeing and Lockheed) and demands prior performance in space, which restricts the field to three or four firms, including Bigelow Aerospace."

Vallee then continues, citing Hal Puthoff:

 "The whole program has a back side" I learned...We've been promised access to hardware and physiology data extracted from the current contractors, who are getting nowhere. In fact, their project got so tangled up in their own compartments that 'the senators' decided to turn to Bob's new company, BAASS (Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies) to do the job."

Adding to this is another diary entry dated 13 July 2008, in which Vallee quotes Robert Bigelow, when talking about the DIA project, as saying:

"I'm writing the response to the RFP now...I've already lined up an administrator...we're still a couple of months away from launching it."

Comments:

1. The conversation between Hal Puthoff and Jacques Vallee occurred on 23 August 2008; before the DIA officially knew, on 5 September 2008, who was bidding; and before the DIA had to select a successful bidder.

2. "We've been promised access to hardware and physiology data extracted from the current contractors..." What current contractors? Is Puthoff saying there was a pre-existing AAWSAP-like project which AAWSAP was replacing? This is my interpretation of this section of Vallee's diary. 

3. BAASS was actually registered in the State of Nevada on 29 January 2008. 

A second McDonnell-Douglas UAP study in the 1970's? - A preliminary article

Introduction

I am continuing my steady re-reading of Jacques Vallee's "Forbidden Science: Volume 5." There are a wealth of interesting little pieces of information to be digested slowly; just like the French food which Vallee frequently refers to in his diary entries.  

It is now common knowledge that the McDonnell-Douglas company conducted an in-house study of UAP between 1967-1969. The leader of this internal company study was Robert M. Wood. Wood published a few details of the project in the July/August 1993 issue of the "International UFO Reporter" in an article "A Little Physics....A Little Friction: A Close Encounter with the Condon Committee" and in much more detail in the October 2008 "MUFON Journal" in an article titled "McDonnell Douglas Studied UFOs in 1960's." There are a number of websites where you can read around 275 pages of documentation of this 1967-1969 study. I posted an article about the project and the contents of some of this documentation on 22 September 2020. 

A second McDonnell Douglas study in the 70's?

Now, when reading "Forbidden Science: Volume 5" I came across references to what appears to have been a separate, and second McDonnell-Douglas UAP study. Below, I extract a number of sections of Vallee's diary entries, from "Forbidden Science: Volume 2,3 and 5" concerning McDonnell-Douglas.

FS2 10 December 1974

Dr. Kit Green Shares Paranormal Stories from the CIA Weird Desk | LoveToKnow

Vallee lunches with Kit Green. 

"Kit reluctantly confirmed there was a group of 15 engineers in the Midwest (I assume it was McDonnell in St Louis) secretly doing UFO research for the CIA under cover of 'aeronautical research.' They're getting data though leaks from Cufos and other amateurs."

Comments:

1. Vallee only assumes it was McDonnell.

2. It says they were doing research for the CIA. In the released papers for the 1967-1969 study there is no reference to the CIA, which suggests this is a separate study. There is mention by Wood in the October 2008 MUFON Journal, of an approach in the spring of 1970 by an unnamed US intelligence agency which wished McDonnell Douglas to provide technical information for what Wood called "Project Skylite." The relevant section of the MUFON article is:

"The only contact with the government about the Project came towards the end of the spring of 1970 when there was interest expressed by one of the intelligence agencies. This resulted in a draft proposal to 'mimic, imitate or duplicate the observables associated with UFOs.' We called this potential opportunity Project Skylite and prepared a good deal of technical information in anticipation of contract work. It never materialized with McDonnell Douglas to my knowledge."

FS2 5 January 1978

"Yesterday I received a telephone call from a fellow, who works with McDonnell-Douglas Astronautics. He told me that 'on a private basis,' he was compiling a new close encounters database. I am not stupid enough to believe that his company has no corporate interest in the matter. They have an on-going secret project, well-funded, with the blessing and official monitoring of the CIA and they're directly connected with major UFO groups."

Comment: So, in 1978 Vallee is again saying that a McDonnell UFO study was still going.  

FS2 15 October 1978

MUFON Founder and Legend John Schuessler Retires! – MUFON

"McDonnell Douglas is continuing their quiet but well-funded study with John Schuessler also monitored by the Agency. They seem to be looking for exotic alloys."

FS3 24 August 1988

Richard Niemtzow

Time with Richard Niemtzow, who says:

"Make no mistake about it, Kit has been studying the subject deeply, in an official capacity. In the seventies, when McDonnell Douglas had a secret study of UFOs under way, who do you think was showing up regularly from Washington to monitor their progress? It was Kit, sent by CIA on official business. He came over whenever one of their aircraft had a sighting. John Schuessler told me that. I found that communication with him was always a one-way street. Those guys are trained that way.

'Whatever happened to the McDonnell study?'

"All they got were some pieces of metal, and they couldn't learn anything from the analysis, it was futile. Of course, being an aircraft company, they thought they would quickly crack the design, the propulsion system.' "

Comment: Here is a clear reference to CIA involvement via Kit Green.  

FS5 10 January 2002

Talking again to Richard Niemtzow.

"The most troubling story Richard tells concerns the UFO Project at McDonnell in the 1970's. He repeated what he'd told me in July 1989. Along with John Schuessler he met in Houston with the head of R&D for McDonnell. A reservation made at a local hotel got cancelled at the last minute.

The man smiled: 'They keep doing this, perhaps to protect me. Let's not talk in here.'

So they spoke in the parking lot. Niemtzow was offered a position with the UFO project. 'What you've been imagining, Richard, wasn't your imagination. There's nothing wrong with your imagination! But if you join us you'll never practice medicine again." Richard said he wanted to remain a doctor, but he's always wondered about that day."

Comment: The troubling story. Could all this after all be the 1967-1969 Study? I don't think so because Niemtzow's name is never mentioned in the documentation we have on the 1967-1969 study. Secondly, Niemtzow was in France undergoing medical training until 1976. In 1975 he joined APRO, while still residing in France. So, this story by Niemtzow does indeed suggest that a second McDonnell study occurred.

FS5 20 Aug 2003

Day with Kit Green.

" ...our discussions...and finally old topics like the McDonnell-CIA study in the seventies. Kit professed not to know anything about its potential records, referring me instead to John Schuessler.

Interestingly, this old McDonnell study is mentioned in the latest issue of Inforespace, the Bulletin of SOBEPS (Belgian Society for the Study of Space Phenomena) (21). Investigator Franck Boittee recalls an observation made by a witness in Assas near Montpellier, on 18 April 1955. Perry Patrakis has also researched the case. About 20 years after the event, five or six investigators, without prior warning visited the witness, Mr. D. in Montpellier.

'Of various nationalities, most of them physicians, they reported to defence departments of their own countries. There was a Moroccan who was a consultant to this commission, he introduced himself as King Hussan II's personal physician.' Mr. D. reported this to J P Troadec in 1988, adding he'd met Richard Niemtzow, but had missed a visit by John Schuessler. This 'commission' was clearly monitored by Kit, who refuses to talk about it-even now."

Comment: A reading of the article, in French, reveals the visit occurred in either 1975,76 or 77. 

FS5 3 October 2003

Vallee was listing those individuals whom he thought knew "the truth."

"John Schuessler's access is probable but dated, given his participation in the McDonnell study of the late seventies."

Comment: Note that Vallee says 'late seventies" and not the "late sixties."

Conclusion:

There seems sufficient anecdotal evidence to suggest that there was indeed a second McDonnell-Doulas/CIA UAP study project in the 1970's. However, I have not been able to locate any documentation at all. I hope that some blog readers may be inspired to conduct their own research into this matter, and report their findings, back to us all.

Australia's involvement in Kirkpatrick's Five Eyes UAP forum

In a blog article dated 21 June 2023, I wrote about a Five Eyes UAP forum held by the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office Director Sean Kirkpatrick. In part, I looked at whether or not an Australian representative was at that forum. Here is an update.

Grant Lavac's questions

Hon Richard Marles MP – Parliament of Australia (aph.gov.au)

Australian researcher Grant Lavac, based in Melbourne, Victoria, submitted a number of questions to the Richard Marles, MP, Australian Minister for Defence, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia. His questions were:

1. Why is Australia not publicly taking the issue of UAP seriously when our US ally is, and has publicly stated that UAP is a global issue requiring global cooperation and collaboration?

2. As the Australian Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister have you been briefed on the issue of UAP to date?

3. What was the extent of Australia's involvement in the Five Eyes forum on UAP and who from Australia was represented?

4. What is the extent of Australia's (past and present) in the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program (FMP)?

The Australian Government response

The response letter dated 30 June 2023, came from B. Sleeman CSC, DSM. Air Commodore, Acting Head of Air Force Capability, and read:

"MC23-002383

Australia's position on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena.

Thank you for your correspondence of 21 June 2023 to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Hon. Richard Marles MP regarding Australia's position on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP). Your correspondence has been referred to me for response.

As outlined in your correspondence, we continue to assess that there is no scientific or other compelling reason to divert resources to the reporting, recording and investigation of UAP. This is reflective of the Australian Government's position on the matter.

While I understand foreign governments have released documentation regarding UAP, this is a matter for their governments as sovereign entities and will not impact Australia's decisions on this matter. Defence will address any emerging threats in accordance with existing policy.

I can confirm that Air Force has not delivered any briefing to the Deputy Prime Minister on the matter of UAP.  Air Force did not attend the Five Eyes forum on UAP or the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program mentioned in your correspondence. 

I understand Air Force has previously responded to your queries regarding this matter on a number of occasions. I am satisfied we have sufficiently addressed your query and as a result, this will be our final correspondence relating to this matter."

 My comments:

1. Air Force Capability appears to be the area of the Australian Department of Defence which has been nominated by the Minister's office to be given the responsibility of responding to queries about UAP.

2. "Air Force did not attend the Five Eyes forum on UAP." This is neither a denial nor a confirmation that a representative of the Australian Government attended the Five Eyes UAP forum held by Sean Kirkpatrick. It is simply a denial that anyone from Air Force attended. It should be noted that if you read the segment of the relevant transcript of Kirkpatrick's comments re the Five Eyes UAP forum, he did not specifically state that someone from Australia attended, simply that Five Eyes included Australia. On the other hand, he did not specifically state that someone from Canada or New Zealand attended, but their respective governments later admitted their representative had indeed attended. 

3. "...or the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program mentioned in your correspondence." Here the Air Commodore seems to understand that there was also a forum on the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program, which is not what Lavac asked. 

4. This overall DoD response is consistent with that from as far back as 2019. It remains to be seen what DOD will do in future as regards UAP and emerging threats. Though I will repeat my previous thought that surely there is an analyst in the Defence Intelligence Organisation who has a brief to at least monitor the topic of UAP.

5. Thanks to Grant Lavac for all his diligent work pursuing responses from the Australian Government on the topic of UAP.

Roger Stankovic

On a very much related piece of correspondence, in a Tweet dated 27 June 2023, Australian researcher and MUFON Director, Roger Stankovic advised that the Deputy Prime Minister had responded to his correspondence "...regarding the need to track and study UAP in our country."

The response letter was dated 23 June 2023 and signed by W. Blyth, AM, Air Vice-Marshal, Head of Air Force Capability.

"MC23-002385

Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

Thank you for your correspondence of 14 June 2023 to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Hon. Richard Marles, MP, regarding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). Your correspondence has been forwarded to me for response. 

At this point in time, Defence continues to assess there is no scientific or other compelling reason to divert resources to the reporting and investigation of UAP. This approach aligns with the priorities, mission and objectives of Defence.

Defence's approach is also reflective of the Australian Government's position on UAPs. I appreciate your interest in UAPs and I trust this information is of assistance."

My comments:

1. One notes the similarity of phrases used in both the letter to Lavac and the letter to Stankovic.

2. Thanks are extended to Roger Stankovic for looking to obtain a further response from the Australian Government via Air Force Capability. 

Recent Canadian correspondence about UAP crash retrieval program

Introduction

Last year, I summarised then current Canadian interest in UAP. In a 22 May 2022 article titled "The Canadian Government and UAP: What do We Know?" and a 24 June 2022 post titled "Canada to Seek Information on Drones and UAP from the USA" I outlined what has come to light so far. 

On 13 May2023, a copy of a letter appeared on Twitter, on an account named "Cambria." The letter was dated 22 March 2023, and was from Canadian politician Larry Maguire, addressed to the Canadian Minister of National Defence. The appearance of the letter at this time went largely unremarked upon. The same letter then resurfaced, and was discussed in Episode #22 of the Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp podcast "Weaponized." It gained massive exposure as a result of this podcast episode.

https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en/larry-maguire(7251)

Text of letter

The full text of the letter read:

"22 March 2023

RE; Defence Research and Development Canada in possession of recovered UAP material.

Dear Minister Anand,

It has come to my attention through meetings with American officials that the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Senate Committee on Armed Services have been undertaking in-camera hearings with government and military subject matter experts on the recovery and exploitation of physical material from Unidentifed Aerial phenomena (UAP).

I am concerned that expected upcoming public announcements will be coordinated between AUKUS which could damage Canada's credibility with our allies and the Canadian public on the global stage. There is an opportunity to have a prepared communications plan in place by May 2023 to reduce this risk.

As Minister of National Defence, you may not be aware, Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) has participated in efforts to analyse UAP, which is publicly traceable to circa 1950. This recovered foreign material is studied through the Five Eyes Foreign Material Program (FMP) which, in Canada is sponsored by the Canadian Forces Intelligence Command linked with several intelligence sharing arrangements and treaties. I am writing to recommend you request a classified briefing, containing full sensitive and protected program information from  your officials on the Government of Canada's historic and ongoing efforts on analyzing recovered UAP material. 

Canada's Chief Science Advisor has also launched the Sky Canada Project, which is investigating how the government of Canada manages UAP reports. They are in the process of identifying key Canadian stakeholder institutions. It is essential the Chief Science Advisor be given full access to defence programs and be briefed on the collaborative scientific research efforts with our allies.

It is imperative the Government of Canada have a communications plan to respond to these upcoming public revelations that will stem from these American FMPs. Not only are there national security and aviation safety concerns that need to be addressed, but there will also be a larger debate about why there is a lack of transparency and accountability regarding UAP programs and policy.

I also believe there must be Parliamentary oversight of efforts by government institutions, and repsonsible ministers should be fully briefed on this program, including releasable-to-the-public content that aligns with allied public disclosure. It is incumbent your department inform you of what collaborative efforts have occurred with our allies and the details of existing Agreements and Memorandum of Understanding that govern the program and may have been conducted through Global Affairs.

Canada's credibility with our allies and the Canadian public must transcend politics and I firmly believe we can work together in a bipartisan manner regardless of the classified details of specific FMPs, the public revelation by these subject matter experts who have testified before Congress present an opportunity for the Government of Canada to take a visible leadership role in confirming the existence of recovered material and balances our national security objectives.

I look forward to your response and if you seek any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me directly.

Sincerely,

Larry Maguire, MP

Brand-on Souris.

CC:

Hon. Melanie Joly, PC, MP.

Hon. Omar Alghabra, DC, MP.

Assistant Deputy Minister (Science & Technology.)

Dr. Mona Nemer, Chief Science Advisor.

Major General Michael Wright, Commander of Canadian Forces Intelligence Command.

Canadian Forces Intelligence Command, Ofice for Release & Disclosure."

 The Canadian Government's response

In a 25 June 2023 article CBC News wrote in part:

"A spokesperson with National Defence Minister Anand's office said she is 'kept fully appraised of relevant incidents through established reporting protocols,' She received the letter and told Maguire in response that neither Defence Research and Development Canada nor the Canadian Forces Intelligence Committee are involved in any 'formal analyis of UAP,' according to a statement sent to CBC News on Monday. All efforts studying UAP at the federal level stopped in the 1960's, the spokesperson said.'

Toronto journalist Daniel Otis undertook his own enquries and on Twitter, published the full text of the government's reply:

"Minister Anand did receive Mr Maguire's letter and has replied to him.

In her reply Minister Anand confirmed that neither Defence Research Development Canada (DRDC) nor Canadian Forces Intelligence Command (CFINTCOM) are involved in any type of formal analysis of UAP. In fact all efforts to study UAP ceased in the 1960's.

The Department of National Defence (DND)  occasionally receives anecdotal reporting of unusual phenomenon, however, these are only investigated when cases are identified as potential threat incidents or events of distress. The Minister of National Defence is kept fully appraised of relevant incidents through established reporting protocols.

We will continue to work closely with our allies and domestic national authorities ensure the safety of Canadians. This collaboration includes providing updates requested by parliamentarians, for example, through Parliamentary committees. In addition DND and the Canadian Armed Forces maintain lines of communication with NORAD and the United States Department of Defence, and routinely exchange information on a number of subjects as part of our long-standing cooperation."

Comments by me:

1. Much was made of the existence of this letter when it finally hit the news in June 2023. Highlights brought forward in numerous outlets included:

* DRDC involved in analysis of UAP material since circa 1950; implying, but not explicitly stating, that this was on-going.

* Maguire was expecting public announcements from AUKUS.

* There is a previously unknown to us, Five Eyes Foreign Material Program.

2. The Canadian Government's response was that neither DRDC nor CFINTCOM 'are involved in any type of formal analysis of UAP.' So, a denial of the two areas which Maguire thought were working on the issue. Note that this denial did not extend to the whole of the Canadian Government. There was no "No areas of the Canadian Government are currently, with the exception of the Chief Science Advisor, working on the subject of UAP"

3. The reference to "circa 1950" in Maguire's letter is probably concerning Project Magnet, which was an official Canadian "flying saucer" study established by Wilbert Brockhouse Smith, who was a senior radio engineer in Transport Canada. The project was active until 1954 and ran informally until 1962. Project Magnet ran in cooperation with the Defence Research Board and the National Research Council.

4. What did Maguire mean when he stated: "expected upcoming public announcements will be coordinated between AUKUS..."? As at 29 June 2023 no such public announcements have been made. 

5. What are Foreign Material programs? Here's a link to an excellent article on the FMP Exploitation Squadron of the USAF's National Air and Space Intelligence Center, which explains FMPs. This article defines foreign material to be such things as weapons systems; parts of aircraft or indeed whole aircraft, drones etc. We kow for example, that NASIC was legislated to receive UAP reports, but the question really is, does the FMP include the recovery and exploitation of UAP? We just don't know. Maguire states that there is a Five Eyes FMP, however, I have so far drawn a blank in trying to find out information about it.

5. Politician Larry Maguire is to be congratulated for raising the UAP subject with the Canadian government as a whole. However, is it possible that some of the information being fed to Maguire, is incorrect? In my opinion, a reference to something going on circa 1950 does not necessarily equate to an ongoing program.

Update: 5 July 2023

Toronto journalist Daniel Otis tweeted details of the Canadian government's response to two questions he posed to them. They were:

Q. Is any other part of the DND/CAF currently involved in formal analysis of UAP?

A. No.

Q. Did any past analysis or involvement pertain to recovered materials/objects, as Maguire alleges?

A. We can confirm that the Canadian Armed Forces/ Department of National Defence (as well as previous iterations) have never had any possession of any UAP materials.