|
by Michael E. Salla, PhD
Nov 15, 2005
from
Exopolitics Website
Colonel Philip Corso has recently become
a renewed focus of interest in the UFO community due to him being
cited by a former Canadian Minister of Defense, Paul Hellyer, as a
reliable source of UFO information. According to Hellyer, a retired
US Air Force general confirmed Corso’s claims about extraterrestrial
technologies described in his book
The Day After Roswell. Along with
confirmation from other confidential ’official’ sources, Hellyer had
the confidence to come forward to declare the existence of a high
level government conspiracy to hide the truth about the UFO
phenomenon and the extraterrestrial presence (see
HERE).
Given his former cabinet level position
in one of the Group of Eight nations, Hellyer’s claims of such a
cover up are nothing short of breath taking. His public emergence at
a symposium titled "Exopolitics Toronto" represents a powerful
fissure in the so far monolithic silence by public officials over
the preponderance of evidence supporting a "Cosmic Watergate".
In his speech, Hellyer discussed the profound policy implications of
developing space weapons to target extraterrestrial visitors. Hellyer was opposed to what he perceived to be a U.S. military
policy of depicting extraterrestrials as "the enemy", promoting the
weaponization of space, and using advanced ’particle beam’
technologies to target extraterrestrial vehicles. He cited the lack
of rigorous public debate over the merits of such a national
security policy as a major objection to it being covertly put in
place.
Hellyer’s approach, however, contrasts
with Philip Corso’s own stated position on the merit of weaponizing
space to deal with what Corso believed to be a genuine ’national
security threat’ posed by extraterrestrials. This article will
explore,
-
the reasons why Corso supported such a view of
extraterrestrials as the enemy
-
whether extraterrestrials do
genuinely pose a national security threat to the U.S. or other
countries
-
the best response to Hellyer’s profound policy
question concerning the weaponization of space and targeting of
extraterrestrials
In his book,
The Day After Roswell, co-authored with
William Birnes,
Corso declared that extraterrestrials were abducting civilians,
violating U.S. airspace, and destroying aircraft sent to intercept
them. He viewed the extraterrestrials as a direct
 threat to U.S
national security and declared:
"For over fifty years, now, the war
against UFOs has continued as we tried to defend ourselves
against their intrusions"
(The Day After Roswell, p. 290).
Elsewhere in
The Day After Roswell,
Corso describes the national security threat posed by UFOs and the
need for a military weaponization program to target and shoot down
UFOs conducting such violations. He specifically championed the
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) as the appropriate response to
extraterrestrial intrusions, and that the US and USSR both knew what
SDI’s true purpose was:
We [US & USSR] both knew who the
real targets of SDI were… It was the UFOs, alien spacecraft
thinking themselves invulnerable and invisible as they soared
around the edges of our atmosphere, swooping down at will to
destroy our communications with EMP bursts, buzz our spacecraft,
colonize our lunar surface, mutilate cattle in their own
horrendous biological experiments, and even abduct human beings
for their medical tests and hybridization of the species. And
what was worse we had to let them do it because we had no
weapons to defend ourselves
(The Day After Roswell, p. 292).
A number of UFO researchers have claimed
that these anti-extraterrestrial statements were introduced by
Corso’s co-author William Birnes, and that Corso was not as
anti-extraterrestrial as The Day After Roswell suggests.
Unfortunately, that is not accurate as a reading of Col Corso’s
original notes make clear. These were published in Italian as
L’Alba Di Una Nuova Era (Dawn of a New Age, 2003) and contain
many similar statements revealing the depth of Corso’s animosity
towards visiting extraterrestrials. For example, in terms of
violating U.S. air space, Corso wrote:
"They have violated our air space
with impunity and even landed on our territory. Whether
intentional or not, they have performed hostile acts. Our
citizens have been abducted and killed"
(Dawn of a New Age, p. 77).
Significantly, Corso goes on to make the
following startling claim about the extraterrestrial visitors:
"The above are acts of war which we
would not tolerate from any worldly source. It also appears they
do not tolerate any such acts on our parts on their bases."
(Dawn of a New Age, p. 77).
Corso in The Day After Roswell
described
extraterrestrial bases on the moon, the implication here is that the
extraterrestrials also have bases on the Earth, and the U.S.
government was powerless to monitor these bases.
Corso went on to fully describe the nature of the interaction
between extraterrestrial visitors and the general population:
... the aliens have shown a callous
indifference concerning their victims. Their behavior has been
insidious and it appears they might be using our earth and
manipulating earth life. Skeptics will excuse them that possibly
they are benevolent and want to help, however, there is no
evidence they have healed anyone or alleviated human ailments.
On the other hand, they have caused pain, suffering and even
death
(Dawn of a New Age, p. 98).
In terms of cooperation between the US
and Russia (former USSR) to deal with the extraterrestrials,
Corso
wrote:
"The U.S. and USSR are aligning their space programs against
a common enemy."
[Dawn of a New Age, 78]
Consequently, it can be concluded that there is no ambiguity in
Corso’s belief that extraterrestrials are a genuine threat to US.
national security and the weaponization of space was an urgent
policy priority to deal with the "extraterrestrial enemy". If alive
today, Corso would no doubt be a strong supporter of the current U.S
Air Force plans to weaponize space and build a global defense shield
that could target extraterrestrial visitors (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0518-02.htm).
In short, Corso has consistently demonstrated strong support for
military solutions to the presence of visiting extraterrestrials
 that in his view were performing abductions and other
’intrusive
activities’ that posed a direct threat to U.S. national security.
The question that can now be raised is whether
extraterrestrials do
genuinely pose a national security threat to the U.S. or the earth
more generally. This question is made very complex by the amount of
conflicting data on the extraterrestrial presence from a variety of
whistleblower and witness sources whose testimony is more difficult
to verify when compared to the case of Corso.
Answering such a
policy question first requires that one understand the nature of the
"national security threat" posed by extraterrestrials. Second, one
needs to identify any groups of extraterrestrials that may be
performing intrusive actions that fall into the category of ’threat’. Finally, one has to identify extraterrestrials performing
non-intrusive activities that do not appear to be a threat to the
national security of the U.S. or other countries.
There is considerable evidence that the U.S. has entered into a
series of technology exchange agreements with a limited number of
extraterrestrial races, and we need to understand the nature of
these agreements to identify the possible threat posed by
extraterrestrials (see
HERE). A number of alleged
whistleblowers such as
Charles Hall,
Michael Wolf,
Daniel Burisch,
Clifford Stone,
Phil Schneider,
William Cooper, etc., describe the
various agreements reached with extraterrestrials that they saw
direct evidence of during their participation in projects or
assignments with the highest possible security classifications.
Furthermore, there is considerable circumstantial and testimonial
evidence pointing to President Eisenhower being actively involved in
meeting with and reaching agreements with extraterrestrial races
(see
HERE). Col Corso himself alludes to
such agreements reached by the Eisenhower administration in various
passages in the Day After Roswell. For example, he wrote:
"We had negotiated a kind of
surrender with them [extraterrestrials] as long as we couldn’t
fight them. They dictated the terms because they knew what we
most feared was disclosure."
(p. 292).
Extraterrestrials that have entered into
these agreements have performed activities in the form of
abductions, genetic experiments and aerial surveillance that lead to
great suspicion as to their ultimate agenda. Corso repeatedly
pointed out that such intrusive actions amounted to an act of war
and justified a concerted military response by U.S. authorities. It
needs to be pointed out that prior to these alleged agreements, most
human-extraterrestrial interactions appeared to be of the benevolent
’space brother’ category that emerged in the 1950’s. ’Contactees’
such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry and others claimed
to have been exposed to a variety of positive extraterrestrial
experiences that inspired a rapid growth in public interest in the
benevolent ’space brothers’. (See
HERE)
There is reason to believe that the
abduction phenomenon that began with the 1961
Betty and Barney Hill
case was a direct result of alleged agreements reached with
extraterrestrials. That is not to say that abductions didn’t happen
before the agreements, but that the agreements enabled the
abductions to increase at a rate which went far beyond whatever the
government authorities responsible for these originally intended.
The government authority responsible for such agreements owes its
origins to the
Majestic-12 control group created by President
Truman
on September 24, 1947 to deal with the UFO phenomenon. Due to its
clandestine nature and unaccountable status, this government entity
responsible for UFO affairs is often referred to as the ’secret
government’. President Clinton when asked by famed
Washington Post
correspondent Sarah McClendon why he didn’t do more to have the
truth about UFOs disclosed, he allegedly confided:
"Sarah, there’s a secret government
within the government, and I don’t control it" (See
HERE)
The ’secret government’ is the
government within the government that controls and makes policy
decisions over how to deal with extraterrestrials; whether they
constitute a ’threat’ or not; and develops agreements with some
extraterrestrial races.
There is intense debate over whether extraterrestrials involved in
abductions (typically described as ’Grays’ from Zeta Reticulum) have
a covert ’take-over’ agenda. Researchers such as Dr David Jacobs
(author of
The Threat) believe the ’Grays’ have a covert plan to
take-over human society by engineering a superior hybrid race. On
the other hand, researchers such as Dr John Mack (author of
Passport
to the Cosmos) believes the star visitors have a ’transformative’
agenda designed to blend together the best characteristics of
extraterrestrials and humanity.
While this is an important debate, it
glosses over one of the key features of the extraterrestrial
presence - the classified agreements reached with the ’secret
government’. Without taking sides in the ’transformative’ vs.
’take-over’ debate, I believe it vital to consider all the data and
come up with a nuanced response that takes into account different
extraterrestrial races performing activities. I have argued
elsewhere that extraterrestrials can be distinguished on the basis
of them either being inside or outside the secret network of
agreements reached with secret government authorities (see
HERE).
The key policy issue is not whether we should establish
communication with extraterrestrials to resolve differences that
lead to confrontations over the number of abductions or other
intrusive activities reported by Corso and others; but the precise
nature of the agreements reached with extraterrestrials, and how
these are conducted in covert and unaccountable manner. As far as
the abduction phenomenon is concerned, it is very likely that these
were made possible by, or accelerated as a result of, secret
agreements by secret government authorities with one or more
extraterrestrial races.
The national security threat posed by extraterrestrials is a covert
one that exists through the classified agreements established by the
secret government with some extraterrestrial races. The motivation
of extraterrestrials that have entered into these agreements is very
questionable and gives considerable cause for suspicion as to their
overall intent. Certainly the great number of abductions that have
occurred give rise to the ’take over’ scenario promoted by Jacobs
and other researchers. Once one considers the vast secret
infrastructure created to develop extraterrestrial technologies and
the illicit funding required for such an infrastructure (see
HERE), it is clear that the
national security threat posed by extraterrestrials is INTERNAL
rather than EXTERNAL. Corso’s depiction of extraterrestrials as an
external military threat to the U.S. is therefore not accurate.
Extraterrestrials that have entered into agreements with secret
government authorities are complicit in the creation of national
security system based on secrecy, unaccountability and illicit
funding. This directly threatens US. national security both in terms
of a covert take-over by extraterrestrials, and an erosion of the
constitutional principles upon which the U.S. is based. The real
national security threat posed by some extraterrestrial visitors is
a result of the desire of the ’secret government’ to acquire and
develop extraterrestrial technologies at any cost, even if it means
giving permission to a limited number of abductions.
On the other hand, extraterrestrials who have not entered into such
technology exchange agreements with
secret government authorities
have behaved in ways that display great consideration and
benevolence towards humanity. This is evidenced in the extensive
number of contacteé or ’space brother’ reports from the 1950’s,
right up to the modern era with alleged contacteés such as Billy
Meier, Sixto Paz Wells, Carlos Diaz, etc. These extraterrestrials
reflect great respect for human free will and follow what appears to
be a clear directive for non-interference.
Extraterrestrials that are trying to
assist humanity, as described by these alleged contacteés, are
secretly being targeted by space weapons in order to capture their
technology or the EBEs themselves. This also includes some of the
Grays from Zeta Reticulum involved in abductions that are included
among the extraterrestrial races secretly targeted as whistleblowers
such as Clifford Stone point out (see
HERE). It does appear that the
relationship between the Grays and the ’secret government’ is a
complex one where some whistleblowers report on military
confrontations between them in terms of the extent to which either
or both have violated the terms of their secret agreements.
In terms of the weaponization of space and SDI, the deliberate
targeting of extraterrestrial visitors who are attempting to
establish communications and contact with an extensive number of
civilians needs to be rigorously debated. This requires putting to a
stop the current U.S. policy of targeting extraterrestrial vehicles.
As Hellyer pointed out in his September speech:
"Are they really enemies or merely
legitimate explorers from afar?"
(see
HERE)
What makes this policy issue complex
from the perspective of whistleblowers such as Corso, who is
representative of many military officials briefed about the
extraterrestrial presence, is that they believe that such a
militaristic policy is appropriate. This policy is justified, in
Corso’s and other military officials’ views, on the basis of the
extensive abductions that are happening, and other extraterrestrial
intrusions that are occurring.
The abduction phenomenon needs to be understood in terms of the
classified agreements reached between the ’secret government’ and
extraterrestrials, and their respective hidden agendas. I consider
it very plausible that there are various factions, both human and
non-human, that want to create as much misunderstanding and conflict
as possible between the U.S. military and different extraterrestrial
races.
It should be pointed out that military
officials such as Corso did not appear to be briefed about friendly
extraterrestrials and the latter’s non-intrusive activities.
Instead, Corso was given information on abduction related activities
and other extraterrestrial intrusions that create the psychological
framework for the creation of ’enemy images’ (or ’enmification’) as
pointed out by Sam Keen in his important book
Faces of the Enemy
(see:
http://www.classroomtools.com/faces.htm).
In short, what we have been seeing over
the last 50 years or so is an ’enmification process’ whereby an
extraterrestrial enemy can be constructed that justifies the
creation of SDI and the weaponization of space. This takes us to the
warnings of
Dr Carol Rosin and
Dr Steven Greer about a contrived
extraterrestrial threat being the basis of a public disclosure of
the extraterrestrial presence (see
HERE).
Consequently, in response to the profound policy question raised by
Hellyer of whether weaponization of space and the development of SDI
is an appropriate policy response to the extraterrestrial presence,
the answer is NO. There is no need for a military response to the
extraterrestrial presence since it is clear that extraterrestrials
who pose a credible ’national security threat’ do so by virtue of
their involvement in a series of secret agreements that make
possible a covert take over of the vast infrastructure of
extraterrestrial related projects that exist in the U.S., and other
countries. This covert extraterrestrial threat requires a POLITICAL
solution rather than a MILITARY solution - public disclosure of the
extraterrestrial presence.
With public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence, there can
be the necessary transparency and accountability to ensure that any
technology exchange agreements with extraterrestrials are conducted
in a responsible way, and do not make human society prone to a
covert ’take-over’ by extraterrestrials that operate in a
clandestine manner. It is very likely that the abduction phenomenon
would cease to be a problem once transparency and accountability
were brought into play. Extraterrestrial visitors performing such
activities could be closely monitored and persuaded from continuing
any activities that violated individual human rights. ’Persuasive
mechanisms’ would come in a variety of ways: rigorous public debate
over extraterrestrial races; educating extraterrestrials about human
rights standards; and the anticipated support of many
extraterrestrial races in monitoring and countering violations by
other extraterrestrial races.
The Honorable Paul Hellyer called for an urgent public debate over
the appropriateness of current military policies directed towards
extraterrestrial visitors. The current policy advocated by Philip Corso of
weaponizing space through SDI and targeting
extraterrestrial vehicles, is supported by many former and current
military officials ’in the loop’ about the extraterrestrial
presence. The development and use of space based military weapons
against extraterrestrial visitors will be shown to be a poor policy
choice once the true history of ’secret government’ and
extraterrestrial agreements are revealed.
As a former Minister of Defense, Paul Hellyer is very familiar with the importance of policy questions
concerning the use of military weapons in resolving international
political problems. He is to be congratulated on bringing to the
public’s attention the "profoundly important policy questions that
must be addressed" with regard to the weaponization of space and the
alleged targeting of extraterrestrial visitors.
From: Dr Michael Salla
Date: 11/09/05 05:15:04
To: exopolitics@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [exopolitics] Paul Hellyer and the Politics of
Exopolitics
Aloha,
here’s a very well written article on
the impact of the former Canadian Defense Minister, Paul Hellyer,
coming forward with his belief in a decades long conspiracy to cover
up the UFO phenomenon.
Hellyer’s emergence is significant for a number of reasons.
-
First, as a former senior
politician he will have significant influence with the current
cadre of Canadian politicians who begin to think about the UFO
phenomenon. Having a senior politician come forward to declare
his views based on his own significant political career, will
help shape the views of others who seriously question what has
been Canada’s official UFO policy.
-
Second, Hellyer relied
on none other than Philip Corso to come forward with his
views. Corso’s testimony was confirmed by Hellyer’s confidential
conversation with a retired USAF general who said that
everything Corso claimed was true and more. This certainly adds
to weight of evidence supporting Corso’s testimony in terms of
official documents putting him in the key positions he claimed
to have served in.
-
Third, Hellyer
demonstrates the approach that many senior politicians will take
to the UFO phenomenon. They are not likely to be impressed by
the data base of UFO sightings accumulated by many UFO
researchers, but are more likely to be convinced by the
testimony of a whistleblower whose identity is informally
confirmed through one’s system of contacts. This in my view
points to emergence of exopolitics as the more suitable
approach to the indisputable government cover up of UFO data
and the ETH.
I think that the issue of
whistleblower testimony again emerges as an important source of
data since senior politicians are likely to give more credence to
their inside contacts verifying whistleblower testimony than what is
reported in the mass media concerning UFO sightings. If there is one
or more retired USAF generals saying off the record to senior
politicians that Corso was genuine, this will silently
continue to shape perceptions of politicians courageious enough to
inquire about the UFO phenomenon. Hellyer is the first of
many politicians who will openly come forward to support many views
that are at the heart of the exopolitics approach.
In peace
Michael E. Salla, PhD
www.exopolitics.org
Paul Hellyer and the
Politics of Exopolitics
by Gord Heath
Nov 5, 2005
from
UFOBC Website
Paul Hellyer
Former Canadian Minister of Defence
Paul Hellyer, a former
Minister of Defense in the Pearson Government, has announced
his belief that UFOs are real and that the US is developing
weapons systems for space which are to be used against alien
craft entering earth’s airspace. He voiced his opinions at the
recent "2005 Toronto Exopolitics Symposium".
Exopolitics is a new term used to describe the study of
the politics of extraterrestrial contact.
It is usually discussed in a context
which assumes that enough evidence exists from existing UFO
reports to conclude that some UFOs are craft that are
piloted by beings originating from other planets and solar
systems. Hellyer’s comments received some coverage in the
national media and stirred some interest and reaction from the
public, mostly from those who have some interest in UFOs.
Hellyer’s History as Political
Nomad
Paul Hellyer was first elected as a Liberal from
Toronto’s Davenport riding in 1949. He was, at that time, the
youngest MP to serve in Canada’s parliament. He served as a
parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defense and
then went on to serve as the Associate Minister of Defense in
the cabinet of Prime Minister Louis Saint-Laurent. He
later served as Minister of National Defense in Prime Minister
Pearson’s cabinet in the mid 1960s and served as Minister of
Transport in the cabinet of Prime Minister Trudeau.
His most notable and controversial
achievement was the integration and unification of Canada’s
army, navy and air forces into a single organization, the
Canadian Forces. At the time, unification sparked considerable
negative reaction from many members of the armed forces who
objected to the manner in which military traditions such as
separate and unique uniforms were discarded.
After resigning from cabinet in a dispute with Trudeau,
Hellyer sat as an independent and later formed a
political party, the Action Canada Party, before crossing to
join the Progressive Conservative Party. He failed in a run for
the leadership of the PCs before leaving that party to rejoin
the Liberals where he failed to secure a nomination. He later
went on to form the Canadian Action Party in 1995.
In terms of influence, the peak of his political career was
probably in his earlier years when he served as a cabinet
minister. His political views gravitated towards concerns about
the threats to Canada’s sovereignty posed by US political and
economic influence in Canadian affairs. In recent years he is
one of many prominent Canadians who have opposed Canadian
support and participation in the US National Missile Defense
program (NMD) and supported calls for a ban on weapons in space.
It is through these contacts that he began to encounter the
views of persons who believe that the US is planning space based
weapons systems to be deployed against ET controlled vehicles
entering earth’s atmosphere from space.
Paul Hellyer states that his beliefs in ET visitation do
not relate back to insider knowledge obtained from his time
spent as Minister of National Defense from 1963 to 1967. At that
time he was largely consumed by other pressing public policy
priorities and paid scant attention to high profile UFO
encounters like the Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia incident in
October 1967 or the Falcon Lake, Manitoba encounter in
May 1967 where Stephen Mickalak received chest burns
from a hovering UFO.
Roswell Writings Change Hellyer’s
Views
Hellyer states his recent interest in UFOs was prompted
by viewing Peter Jennings TV documentary on the topic. He later
read "The Day After Roswell" by Col. Philip J. Corso,
who once served as the head of the Foreign Technology Desk at
the US Army’s Research and Development department. In his book,
Corso asserts that parts from a crashed alien vehicle were
recovered from the July 1947 incident at Roswell, New Mexico
which the US Army Air Force later explained as a weather
balloon.
Corso states some parts were
transferred to a "file cabinet" at the Pentagon where
they were used to guide developments in several technologies
such as integrated circuits, night vision systems and lasers.
Col. Philip John
Corso
Author of controversial book, "The Day After Roswell"
Many UFOlogists dispute conclusions
that a UFO crashed at Roswell, New Mexico in 1947. Others do not
believe Corso’s specific allegations in his book relating to his
role in applying ET derived technologies from this alleged
crashed UFO to practical recent technological
innovations. Stanton Friedman is a nuclear physicist who
investigated Roswell and has books about the Roswell crash
and MJ-12, the alleged top secret US committee created to
study UFOs.
Friedman, who now resides in
New Brunswick, casts doubts on Corso’s claims that he was the
central figure responsible for seeding technology derived from
wreckage taken from the ET spaceship which (allegedly) crashed
at Roswell. In response to those who question how he came to
believe the contents of this specific book, Hellyer
states that he personally spoke with an unnamed US General who
assured him that all of this and more was true.
Exopolitics Versus the UFO
Fundamentalists
For some UFOlogists, Hellyer’s foray into Exopolitics
was not welcomed. The very notion of a study of the politics
of extraterrestrial contact is hotly contested by many as
they feel that UFOlogists must focus on the scientific
investigation of UFO phenomena. Some reason that there is
insufficient evidence to conclude that some UFOs may be vehicles
incorporating technology far beyond those developed by earth
civilization.
The reality is that all of this is mostly a debate happening
amongst a very small group of researchers and interested persons
that has little measurable impact on the information shared
through mass media outlets like television, radio and
newspapers.
There are few celebrities of any sort who want to risk their
profile and public following to publicly state their views on
the possible importance posed by UFO encounters,
especially if some have extraterrestrial origins. Few
politicians have been brave enough to face the ridicule posed by
suggesting there might be anything worthwhile to gain through
the study of UFOs.
President Carter and President
Reagan both spoke
about personal UFO encounters but made few other public
statements about the policy implications posed by these events.
It might be expected that any viewpoint supporting the possible
reality of ET visitation to the planet might be welcomed by
those UFOlogist’s who claim to be open to this possibility. But
due to deep divisions between some UFOlogists and persons who
advance the study of exopolitics, this has not been the
case.
As an example, Paul Hellyer’s statements to the
Exopolitics conference in Toronto were mocked and ridiculed
by filmmaker Paul Kimball of Redstar Films based
in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Kimball’s views are of some
significance as he is one of the few Canadians to have an
interest and financial stake in producing documentary films on
UFO related topics. His documentaries include "Stanton T.
Friedman IS Real" and "Do You Believe in Majic?" He is
currently working on film documentaries on cattle mutilations
and the ten best UFO cases.
Kimball Believes Hellyer Should
Have Known UFO Secrets
Paul Kimball
UFO Documentary Filmmaker
One of Kimball’s posts on his weblog
"The
Other Side of Truth" was largely focused on heaping
scorn on Hellyer’s nomadic political career "Ladies and
Gentlemen – Meet the REAL Paul Hellyer". His earlier post on
Hellyer "Paul Hellyer – The Big Fish Flops" raised more
specific issues relating to Hellyer’s statement. Kimball’s
opinion is that if anyone would know about UFO secrets, it would
have been Hellyer:
"Because if anyone in Canada
would have known about the Cosmic Watergate, and UFO
secrets, and alien bases, etc. etc., it would have been the
Minister of National Defense in the mid 1960s."
This statement assumes that the
Minister of National Defense is privy to all secrets contained
within the Department of National Defense. It further assumes
that any questions concerning the security implications of UFO
incursions into Canadian air space would require a continuing
policy review from the Minister of National Defense. What if
Canadian policy on the security implications of UFOs was
already determined by our participation in NORAD
continental air defense, established back in the early 1950s?
US Policy Was to Debunk UFOs
There is documentation to suggest that there was considerable
concern about the possible security risks posed by UFOs during
the early post World War 2 time period. The US Air Force
initiated several studies of UFOs to evaluate the potential
threat to national security. It was initially thought that the
UFOs might be secret weapons produced by Germany or the
Soviet Union. It was later determined that the UFOs were not
foreign developed weapons systems and one study in the US Air
Force concluded some UFOs possibly had an "interplanetary
origin". In his UFO books, Major Donald Keyhoe documented
the struggle in the US Air Force between those who favored open
sharing and disclosure of UFO information with the public and
"the silence group" who feared that the public was not prepared
for this information and wanted to keep all unsolved reports
secret.
The CIA sponsored
Robertson Panel Report in 1953
appears to have set the policy direction for US government
agencies including intelligence and military agencies regarding
UFOs. It suggested that the credible UFO reports should be
debunked, that only reports of easily explainable occurrences of
meteors and such should be publicized, and that the activities
of civilian UFO study groups should be monitored. It was
concluded that there was no evidence that UFOs posed a specific
security threat to the US, but that the reporting of UFOs might
trigger the mass hysteria that was observed following the radio
broadcast of "The War of the Worlds". The panel felt that the
mass media could be used to discredit UFO sightings. It was also
concluded that there was no evidence that UFOs were actually
advanced vehicles piloted by beings from other planets.
The official study of UFOs by the US Air Force did
continue through
Project Blue Book until the
1968 University of Colorado "Condon
Committee Report" advised that Blue Book
should be shutdown as there was nothing further to be gained
from the study of UFOs. But even though Project Blue Book
continued through the 1950s to the late 1960s, it was largely
ineffectual in conducting serious research into UFOs and its
direction was largely to abide by the policy framework
established through the Robertson Panel Report.
The more serious and contentious question is whether some
persons connected with the study of UFOs decided to continue
studies in a compartmentalized and secret organization and
program. Those who support this view refer to documentation
suggesting such a group, possibly called
MJ-12, has been operating in
the US since the late 1940s or early 1950s. A key contention is
that the existence of this organization and its activities are
hidden behind walls of internal security from any and all
elected and publicly accountable officials such as presidents,
cabinet members, senators and members of congress. This secrecy
is allegedly maintained by threats and intimidation. While some
information does leak out, it is countered by the deliberate
leakage of "disinformation" which masks the truth behind many
seemingly related but false or partially false allegations.
Some theorists believe that some of the information about these
programs is released in a controlled manner to eventually
prepare the public for a broader and more open disclosure of
the real history of UFO studies.
What About Canada?
Did Canada have an active UFO study program in the
mid-sixties? Did the Canadian government ever formally establish
a policy direction concerning the potential national security
implications posed by UFOs?
While there has certainly been many UFO encounters involving
RCAF aircraft and radar installations, there does not seem to
exist a paper trail showing the policy direction that guided
reaction to these events. The RCAF did perform some study of UFO
incidents, but there is not any clear indication of the policy
objective that framed this study. It is quite possible that the
elected arm of the Canadian government, the PMO and cabinet,
have never prepared a policy directive concerning the study of
and response to UFO incidents.
Perhaps there has never been
sufficient pressure to require a government policy response.
Perhaps government bureaucracy including National Defense
has preferred to set their own internal policy. The media has
largely ignored reporting of UFO events since the 1950s and the
public is itself fragmented by differing belief systems and
focused on more tangible and immediate priorities.
In Canada, the study of UFOs was offloaded to the National
Research Council in 1968, the year that the US disbanded the
USAF "Project Blue Book" study of UFOs. There were few
scientists at NRC who harboured any willingness to show interest
in the objective study of a "frivolous topic" like
UFOs, except for the purposes of finding and locating fallen
meteorites. The timing of the offload of UFO study
responsibility suggests that Canada was simply following the US
lead in its policy towards the study of UFOs.
Since the mid 1950s, Canada has participated in NORAD which
provides security of Canadian and US air space from foreign
incursions. The response to any unidentified return that shows
up on NORAD radar systems would abide by the policies and
regulations established by the joint US and Canadian NORAD
command structure. It is therefore quite likely that our
response to UFOs detected by the military would abide by NORAD
policies which are likely largely developed by US military
strategists.
It is theoretically possible that the US has actually
discouraged Canadian government research into UFOs because they
might be concerned that the results of such studies might be
released to the public or may be obtained by competing foreign
governments.
There Never Was a Project Magnet
It is difficult to catch Paul Kimball’s line of reasoning on
Hellyer. Apparently he sees Hellyer’s disclosure that
as a defense minister, he knew little or nothing about UFOs as
proof positive that the Canadian government has never had an
interest in UFOs. He might be right that most people in
government were at most puzzled by what they heard. But there
were certainly some people in the Canadian military that had to
be concerned about what was reported by pilots and radar
observers in various military encounters with UFOs.
Kimball goes on to say "There was no super secret Wilbert Smith
research project" in his efforts to debunk the notion that the
Canadian government ever had any interest in studying UFOs. The
project he is referring to is "Project
Magnet", a program run by Department of Transport
scientist, Wilbert Smith.
The project was concerned with the idea that the earth’s
magnetic field might be the force used by the flying saucers for
their propulsion. It later led to a small UFO detection station
at Shirley Bay near Ottawa, Ontario. Project Magnet
was funded by government from 1950 to 1954 and the UFO detection
station was publicly funded from 1952 to 1954. Although the
project was supposedly secret, the UFO detection station was
written about in several newspaper articles. It appears that
publicity surrounding the station possibly contributed to the
government’s decision in 1954 to discontinue funding for the
project.
Flying Saucer
Detection Station at Shirley Bay near Ottawa
This photograph was published in the Toronto Globe and Mail,
on the same day
as a USAF F-89 disappeared after merging
with a UFO on
radar in Canadian air space over Lake Superior.
Paul Kimball goes on to state
"There was no secret plan to get an alien spacecraft to land in
Alberta". I guess the point here is to disprove any notion that
the Canadian military had any interest in the UFO phenomena.
Here Kimball must be referring to the article printed in the
Ottawa Journal in July 1967, "UFO Landing Site was 13 Year
Secret". The article states,
"The Canadian Government 13
years ago made available the defense research board
experimental station at Suffield, Alberta as a landing site
for Unidentified Flying Objects, defense minister Paul
Hellyer has now disclosed."
The article goes on to state:
"Nothing ever materialized from
that top secret project. No extraterrestrial flying objects
ever sought to land on that 1000 square mile restricted
tract of land over which no aircraft, civilian or military,
was allowed to fly without special permission. The idea
behind the classified project was that if any UFO
tried to make contact with earth it could land at the DRB
station without being shot down by defense
interceptors."
CFB Suffield
This Canadian Forces Base is located northwest of Medicine Hat,
Alberta. For decades it was Canada’s primary research centre
into chemical and biological weapons. It is also alleged to have
been designated as a top secret reserved "UFO landing site" back
in the early 1950s.
Yurko Bondarchuk refers to
the alleged site in his 1979 book "UFO Sightings, Landings
and Abductions – The Documentary Evidence". He revealed that
Captain Douglas Caie, Public Information Officer from
National Defense Headquarters in Ottawa stated regarding the
alleged UFO landing site at Suffield,
"We have no record of any such
program… From the information I have, we never had one."
According to the 1973 book "Aliens
from Space" by Donald Keyhoe, US Air Force
intelligence learned of the restricted landing site at Suffield
in 1954. According to Keyhoe, the site was established
when efforts by the RCAF to "bring down" a UFO failed. The
intent was to lure the aliens into landing but there was
apparently nothing to indicate the area was reserved for alien
machines.
In the 1950s through to the 1970s, the experimental station at
Suffield was Canada’s main centre for research into chemical and
biological WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). This
included the testing of mustard gas and sarin on
soldiers and other human test subjects. Suffield was also
the primary Canadian test site for biological weapons such as
anthrax, plague, ricin and botulinum toxin. It is also alleged
that the RCAF has engaged in many pursuits of UFOs with its
fighter jets since the 1950s. It is perhaps little wonder that
the UFOs would not choose to land at a site controlled by
Canadian National Defense which is devoted to chemical and
biological weapons research.
What was the source for this story? Why would the government
designate a military base as a "safe landing site" for UFOs?
AFFA and PONNAR Orbit Earth and
Make Contact
What I have found quite interesting about this, aside from
Kimball’s denials, is the whole history of Smith as it
relates to Canada’s UFO studies of that period. While
investigating this whole episode of the alleged UFO landing site
at Suffield, I was quite surprised to find out that there might
be a connection between this "bit of Canadian UFO fantasy" and
our favourite UFO/ET proponent, Wilbert Smith. This story
goes back to a UFO researcher named Grant Cameron.
Through his interest of the alleged
alien landing site at Suffield, he engaged Hellyer in a
long period of correspondence with the purpose of locating
certain information about the site. Grant Cameron wrote
Hellyer several times in the 1970s, trying to determine
the identity of the top defense department official who had
revealed the existence of the secret Suffield "UFO landing
site". Hellyer was never able to recall the name of the
official, but told Cameron that he had searched his files at
National Archives but was unable to locate his UFO file, which
apparently contained notes from defense briefings on UFOs.
The story does not stop there however. Cameron states
that in 1978 he interviewed Wilbert Smith’s widow and
asked her if she remembered anything about the Suffield UFO
landing site. In her version of the story, her husband had been
making efforts to convince government officials that the aliens
existed and that they should make efforts to talk to them face
to face, to learn who they were and what they wanted.
Wilbert Smith
Canadian radio scientist and prominent "UFO Contactee"
ran Project
Magnet and UFO Detection Station for the federal government.
Here the story begins to get very
weird. In August 1954, the technology publication "Aviation
Week and Space Technology" reported that Dr. Lincoln
LaPaz was conducting a study of two "satellites" which had
been recently discovered orbiting the earth at 400 miles and 600
miles above the surface. According to the article, the
satellites had caused worries in the Pentagon as they
were initially believed to be artificial. This was three years
before the Soviet Union launched "Sputnik" the first human
manufactured artificial satellite into orbit. The story was
subsequently covered by several newspapers.
Some people believed that the two mystery satellites were alien
spaceships. One of these people was a Mrs. Frances Swan,
who lived in Eliot, Maine. She claimed that beginning in April
1954 she began receiving channelled messages from the commanders
of two alien ships orbiting the earth, AFFA who commanded ship
M-4 and PONNAR who commanded ship L-11. For some reason or
another, AFFA was the main alien contact for Swan and other
contacteés. Wilbert Smith, who was a strong believer
in aliens, maintained contact with Swan and other "AFFA"
contacteés. He also allegedly tried alternative methods for
establishing contact with AFFA on his own or through various
intermediaries.
Back to the story of the Suffield
UFO landing site…
Mrs. Smith told Grant Cameron that Wilbert
believed that if the government stopped shooting at UFOs, then
he might be able to get spaceship commander AFFA to land for a
meeting. Apparently AFFA had given this indication in a contact
to Swan. Smith indicates that he approached a top secret
committee in government to relay this request and they had
agreed to allow AFFA a safe place to land. When Smith
relayed this agreement back to AFFA, he was told that AFFA would
also require assurances that he would also be free to take off
without any interference. According to Cameron, Mrs. Smith told
him that the top secret committee would not agree to this, and
so the landing never took place.
As weird as this story is, it is at least partially true. We
know that Wilbert Smith was "a UFO contacteé" and a "true
believer" that some of the UFOs were spaceships flown by aliens.
Mr. Smith really did receive government funding for his "Project
Magnet" and the "UFO Detection Station" at Shirley’s
Bay. We know that Paul Hellyer did apparently reveal that
Suffield Research Station had been designated as a top secret
UFO landing site sometime back in the mid-1950s. His
statement revealing this site was apparently made when he
attended the official opening of the "UFO Landing Pad" in St.
Paul, Alberta, which was a community project for Canada’s
centennial.
From Mrs. Smith’s telling, the aliens never landed because the
Canadian government wouldn’t consent to granting the commander
permission to freely leave. What Hellyer was told and
what was in his notes seems forgotten and lost with his vanished
UFO file. The Suffield story seems to at least be partially true
and it would be fascinating to know the complete real story
behind it.
From what we know sitting in our stuffy armchairs reading these
stories and perhaps getting a good chuckle or two, is that
AFFA and PONNAR appear to have left earth orbit,
probably not impressed with the diplomacy extended by the
Canadian government of that time.
Present Media Climate Discourages
Interest in UFO Study
It is difficult to assess what impact Hellyer’s comments
have had on the Canadian public. I have had a few people mention
to me that they had heard something about this, but they seemed
largely unaware of any details concerning Hellyer’s comments.
The National Post published a column by regular political
columnist Andrew Coyne. In his piece, "Holding Editors to
Account", Coyne seems amazed by Hellyer’s belief
in a decades long government conspiracy to withhold secrets
about UFOs from the public, and thinks this might mean that
Hellyer has lost his marbles. He links Hellyer’s "conspiracy
views" with those of someone who believes the US government
created the Islamist terrorist network that they are now
fighting. Coyne proclaims his belief in factual reporting
but calls on newspaper editors to be more selective and "exclude
the obviously marginal".
"There is a time and a place to
debate whether the earth goes around the sun or the
contrary, but we should have little time to address other
matters if we were perpetually revisiting old controversies,
or disproving every fantasy."
I guess this explains why large
media outlets almost never report any UFO unless it can
be easily explained as a meteor.
It is a very rare event for any large media outlet to present
any news relating to UFOs and alien visitation with a straight
face. Discovery Channel did recently produce a
satisfactory summary of the Exopolitics conference in Toronto
but they prefaced it with a goofy cartoon UFO landing. Perhaps
this was done to assure the audience that they were not
intending anyone to take this in any way seriously.
The same thing happens on CBC Radio anytime they have
Chris Rutkowski providing reports from his annual survey of
Canadian UFO events. It is always prefaced with yuk- yuk UFO
alien jokes. I once heard an interview on "As it Happens"
with an Indiana police officer who was witness to a huge
triangular UFO that was seen by several officers in adjacent
counties. The interviewer could hardly contain her smirking
attitude while the officer tried his best to provide cool
responses to her demeaning line of questioning. After the
interview was concluded she was almost rolling on the floor in
giggles as she said,
"Pardon me, but I really have to
wonder what it is that they put in the water down there!"
It is hard to believe that such
consistent disrespect can be dished out so casually
by mass media outlets when it so clearly shows contempt for the
views and beliefs of large parts of their reading, listening and
viewing audience. The best that audience members can do when
this bias and derogatory demeanour is displayed in the media is
to complain to these media outlets.
As long as the present climate of ridicule persists in the large
media organizations, this climate will discourage any serious
researcher from publishing material on UFOs and will discourage
agencies from funding this research.
Hellyer Believes in Public Role in
Government Response to Alien Contact
Hellyer has stated his belief that elected governments
have been largely excluded from information which is held within
the bureaucracy about UFOs. He has in fact used his own
experience to buttress this argument.
UFOlogy has not made great strides in finding conclusive,
unambiguous evidence for the ETH (Extra-terrestrial
hypothesis) or any other theory on the origin for unexplained
UFOs. Despite this failure, many UFOlogists have evaluated the
evidence and concluded for themselves that the ETH is the
most likely explanation for the phenomena. Given the potentially
serious implications of this hypothesis, it makes sense to
seriously investigate the potential implications of this
hypothesis and to seek answers to the following questions:
-
Who are the visitors?
-
What do they want from us?
-
How are our governments
reacting to this presence?
-
Are government agencies
hiding information about UFOs from the public?
Paul Hellyer is the perhaps
the first former senior Canadian government minister to
suggest that these questions are important policy questions and
that the public has a right to be involved in the development of
policy regarding the response of government to possible
extra-terrestrial contact events.
It is the duty of UFOlogists to seek truth and clarity in the
reporting of UFO incidents. It is also our duty as citizens to
seek the answers to the key questions posed in Exopolitics
forums if we are at all open to the possibility that some UFOs
may indeed be advanced vehicles fabricated and possibly piloted
by beings from extraterrestrial civilizations.
And while many of the stories circulating in the UFO field are
arguably in the category "too good to be true" you never
know, you really, really never know…
From: Dr Michael Salla
Date: 12/03/05 00:23:09
To: exopolitics@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [exopolitics] Fox News Interview with Paul Hellyer
Paul Hellyer continues to amaze with his courageous efforts
to speak the truth about the UFO phenomenon. Here’s a
transcript of his recent interview on the Fox News Network.
He certainly is getting the attention of many people.
In peace,
Michael E. Salla, PhD
www.exopolitics.org
Interview With Paul Hellyer
by Greg Jarrett
November 26, 2005
from
LexisNexisNews Website
JARRETT: It is one of the most important problems facing
our planet today. It’s an inter-galactic war with aliens. That’s
what Paul Hellyer, a former Canadian Minister of
Defense and Deputy Prime Minister said in a recent September
speech and interview. Now he is asking the Canadian Parliament
to hold hearings on relations with alien civilizations.
Joining me now to explain is Paul Hellyer himself. Thank you
very much for being with us, Minister.
PAUL HELLYER, FORMER CANADIAN DEFENSE MINISTER:
It’s a pleasure.
JARRETT: Here’s what you said: UFO’s are as real as the
airplanes that fly over your head. Wow, how do you know that?
HELLYER: Well, because they are. And they do fly over
your head all the time.
JARRETT: Well, aren’t those airplanes?
HELLYER: No, the airplanes fly over your head, but so do
vehicles from some other galaxy.
JARRETT: How can you tell they’re not just airplanes?
HELLYER: Well, because a lot of people have seen them,
the United States government has one or two, at least, in their
possession. And a lot of people have seen some of the wreckage
from the crash at Roswell and have worked to re-engineer,
back-engineer some of the materials that were found there, for
the benefit of the United States industry.
JARRETT: Are you telling me you think that American
scientists have re-engineered the alien wreckage from
that supposed, and I emphasize that world, UFO crash at
Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947, to do what? Produce some sort
of modern technological marvel?
HELLYER: Yes, absolutely, from microchips to
particle guns, lasers, all sorts of things that seem
like modern marvels and many of them were speeded up
immeasurably thanks to the wreckage from the Roswell crash.
JARRETT: Have you seen any of that wreckage yourself?
HELLYER: No, I haven’t, but I’m familiar with people who
claim to have seen it, including some in the basement of the
White House.
JARRETT: Really? Now, have you seen a UFO yourself?
HELLYER: No, I haven’t.
JARRETT: Oh, you haven’t?
HELLYER: No.
JARRETT: Well, wouldn’t you want to see one before you
came out publicly with your incredible resume and say, "look,
we’ve got to hold hearings, the aliens are coming."
HELLYER: No, because I have read books written by
reputable people, including Lieutenant Colonel Corso, who
actually saw one of the bodies from the crash at Roswell, and
who later, 10 years later, when he was working for the United
States Army, was personally responsible for seeking some of the
crash material into various industries there, for the benefit of
those industries and for the...
JARRETT: Let me quote you further, because we’re a little
short on time. I want to quote you further: The U.S. military --
you can put this up on the screen -- are preparing weapons,
which could be used against the aliens, and they could get us
into an intergalactic war. The Bush administration has
finally agreed to let the military build a forward base on
the moon, which will put them in a better position to keep
track of the goings and comings of visitors from space, and to
shoot at them.
HELLYER: Yes, I think it’s in the plans. It’s been really
in the plans for, probably 40 or 50 years, originating with
General Trudeau.
JARRETT: Mr. Hellyer, I’m out of time here, but
there might be a lot of people, or some people, or maybe just
one person watching that thinks you’re a lunatic. What would you
say?
HELLYER: I would say they are totally out of the loop,
that they haven’t taken any trouble to research this subject.
And if they had taken the least bit of trouble, that their
skepticism would be eliminated and they would be just as certain
of their conclusions as I am.
JARRETT: All right, Paul Hellyer, former minister
of defense, deputy prime minister in Canada. Thanks so much.
HELLYER: Do a little research on your own.
JARRETT: Oh, I will.
|
