What’s in the book?

Hopefully the previous posts on Unidentified have given those interested a good idea of the general goals and content of the book.  I’m always happy to take more specific questions but before I return to posting on other areas of interest I thought I would provide some further detail on Unidentified content.

To that end the following is an excerpt from the topical index. It provides a listing of the service/agency studies, the security incidents/investigations and the researcher studies/papers discussed in the book.  This should give some idea of the data which went into the actual analysis and indications analysis studies which constitute the meat of the book.  From that perspective other critical source data is found in the NICAP, Sparks and NARCAP incident databases.

Service and Agency Studies/Reports:

A Note on Pyrotechnic Activity over Germany

Enemy Defenses Phenomena

Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Forces in Europe (SHAEF)

Scientific Intelligence Advisory Section

Japanese Air Defense – Balls of Fire

Swedish Ghost Rocket committee

Central Intelligence Group

Analysis of Flying Object Incidents in the U.S

Joint Research and Development Board

Midland/Grebe study

MIT incident/study

Analysis of Flying Saucer Incidents in the United States

Initial Report on Unidentified Flying Objects Project Sign

Flying Object Incidents in the United States

Air Force press memorandum, Project Saucer

Air Force Scientific Advisory Board

Anomalous Luminous Phenomena/Sixth Report

Battelle Memorial Institute

Special Report #14

Central Intelligence Agency

Intelligence Advisory Committee (NSC)

IAC Report

NSCID

Joint Intelligence Committee (Joint Chiefs)

Scientific Advisory Panel

Robertson Panel

Durant report

 

Security Incidents/Investigations:

Atomic Energy Commission

FBI

Office of Special Investigations

AFOSI

OSI

Army the Counter Intelligence Corps

CIC

AEC Security

Los Alamos

Oak Ridge

Hanford

Killeen Base

Monzano

Sandia Base

Washington National

Loring

Ellsworth

Fairfield Suisan

Westover

Pease

Hamilton field

Harmon Field

Pantex

Kirtland

Savannah River

Hampton Roads

Elmendorf AFB

Great Falls AFB

Davis-Monthan

Malmstrom

Northern Tier

Altus AFB

Carswell AFB

Whiteman AFB

Minot AFB

Wurthsmith AFB

Research Papers:   (Authors and sources cited in text and end notes)

A Historical and Physiological Perspective of the Foo Fighters of World War Two

            Guided Missiles and UFOs: A Tangle of Fear – 1937-53

            Report on the UFO Wave of 1947

            The Midland Fireball: Dow Chemical’s Early Involvement with UFO’s

            The White Sands Proof

            The Oak Ridge Sightings

            Technical Approaches to the Problems of UFOs.” /Detection of Radiation  

            Major Fournet’s Motion Study

            Civilian Saucer Investigation

Secret History of the 4602d Air Intelligence Service Squadron

B-52 & Gnd Radar / Radar Visual / Radar Freqs From UFO

RB-47 case, July 17, 1957, Mississippi – Louisiana-Texas-Oklahoma

UFO Over Titan Missile Silo; Oracle, Arizona; August 7, 1962

Minot Tracks Object, B-52 Sees & Tracks UFO

Advertisements

Roads Not Traveled

The press release for Unidentified refers to the “study the government did not do” and that might sound it bit mysterious – it’s supposed to since it is an effort to get attention. In reality we could have taken it further and talked about “studies” plural, since there are actually several types of intelligence related studies that were not done, by the Air Force, by its consulting groups and by the larger national intelligence community. The book explores that issue in considerable detail, highlighting the fact that even though senior Air Force officers were very much aware of specific patterns within the UFO reports of the first years, and actually proposed certain focused technical collections field studies, those studies were never conducted. In the earliest post war years that was simply because resources such as radar systems, radar operators and even interceptors were not available. Later those resources were tied up by both the Korean war and the urgent priority of setting up a continental air defense network to intercept what was assumed to be an imminent, preemptive Soviet attack on the nation.

Few UFO books make mention of those limitations and in the early years certainly the Air Force never made a point of them since it was constantly concerned about exposing the limitation of its air defense capability. Continental air defense was virtually nonexistent when the first flying saucers were reported in 1947 and remained extremely limited until 1951/1952.  At that point in time matters became even more embarrassing – and more concerning from a security standpoint – because the defenses which had been put into place proved largely ineffectual in responding to UFO reports. Even with radar tracking and interceptor scrambles and actual intercepts, the unknown targets could either evade or simply leave the interceptors behind at will.  That was not something the military wanted touted in the media, it was bad enough to have newspaper headlines about UFOs repeatedly being tracked over Washington DC with interceptors responding only after delays of up to two hours.

Following that fiasco the CIA was brought into the picture, internally elevating certain concerns that Air Force intelligence was aware of but had not itself elevated as a true national security concern,

“Sightings of unidentified flying objects at great altitudes and traveling in the vicinity of major U.S. defense installations are of such a nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles.”

 

Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director, Office of Scientific Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, December, 1952

 

You can imagine what sort of issues that sort of assessment raised within the Air Force – beginning with the fact that not only were its then current defensive measures unable to cope with those incidents but that the same might well apply to its proposed computerized, automated air defense network (later named SAGE). Even the specifications for that new capability would leave it far short of coping with the speeds and maneuvers being reported. The same would apply to the new Century series interceptors under development and to a variety of new anti-aircraft missiles.  Those weapons could deal with the anticipated Russian bomber attack, but certainly not the most anomalous unknowns being reported. A broader inquiry  might also have shown that air defense exercise against the nation’s own strategic bombing force, SAC, were demonstrating a consistent failure to intercept and stop low level jet bombing strikes, bringing into question the entire, massive military spending program (far greater than the atomic bomb project of WWII).

 

What happened following that OSI assessment is indeed a fascinating story, with its own unanswered questions. And there are other study mysteries. For example, the Air Force was well aware of the patterns in UFO reports, patterns which pointed to targeting of specific types of military installations and in particular atomic warfare complex facilities. And in 1952 it contracted for a statistical analysis of UFO reports. Not surprisingly that turned into an extended project, yet when the study was finally released to the public (or when some version of it was released at least), the maps and charts used to show geographic distribution of sightings in no way reflect known concentrations in regard to actual military or strategic targets. That part of the study appears to be useless in terms of the patterns we know both Air Force Intelligence and the CIA were seeing, clearly raising questions of incompetence, mis-communication, mis-management – or obfuscation in the released version of the report.

 

And in the 1960s we see a total lack of strategic/military focus in the final study contracted by the Air Force, the study which produced a report (known as the Condon Report) whose summary and conclusions ignores much of its own investigative work and the data which it collected. In itself the lack of a military focus in any study paid for by the Air Force seems a bit strange when you think about it. On the other hand if the key objective for Air Force was transition the whole problem to the scientific community – divesting itself from an intelligence (and defense) challenge that had defeated it, perhaps it makes a great deal of sense, at least from a pragmatic point of view.

 

Unidentified explores what the Air Force did and did not do in the way of UFO studies but beyond that it moves on to the subject of what the national intelligence community should have done, might have done, most definitely didn’t do – and that proves even more interesting than what the Air Force failed to do. There were patterns, far more extensive and subtle ones than those being discussed by Air Force Intelligence and the CIA/OSI in 1952.  And those patterns evolved and became far better defined during the following three decades. But that requires a great deal of context and involves several chapters – which means you really need to read the book.

Mind Games

Once you begin to really appreciate the extent to which unidentified aerial objects were seriously considered as a potential military/security threat, certain things become less mysterious and the  activities of a number of government agencies much more understandable – although far more intrusive than most of us might have imagined at the time. That is just one of the aspects to the national security problem of UFOs which surface throughout the studies in Unidentified. The documents now available leave no room for doubt that both Soviet psychological warfare and technical espionage were very active concerns of the official UFO investigations.

 

Those who have been interested in the subject of UFOs for any extended time are likely familiar with the earliest discussions of mysterious investigators in civilian clothes, even more mysterious “men in black” and in later years actual military personnel who moved from routine UFO investigations into much more aggressive and even damaging interactions with witnesses. Certain of those activities ultimately appear to have generated many of the outright hoaxes and myths that continue to frustrate serious citizen inquiry into the subject – and yes, in terms of full transparency I’m talking about the constantly expanding volume of Majestic 12 documents and even worse grays, reptilians, underground bases, interstellar treaty agreements, secret scientific teams and human “harvesting”.

 

If you are interested in UFOs and have never heard any of those topics mentioned – congratulations.   If you have I would strongly suggest that you do a reality check by reading Project Beta by Greg Bishop, and even better Mirage Men by Mark Pilkington. You don’t have to bring aliens into the subject to find some really nasty things going on.

 

The reality of the covert intelligence activities is deadly serious, albeit less sensational than that of mysterious men in black (those movies were late to the party, the MIB had been discussed for decades before they hit the screen). And those activities are totally understandable in the context first of post WWII America and later of the ongoing Cold War.

 

As early as 1946, the brand new Central Intelligence Group advised President Harry Truman that it appeared the Soviets were actively involved in the use of rockets and related devices as a form of psychological warfare in Scandinavia.  The assessment was that the Soviets were covertly demonstrating potential weapons based in adapted German ballistic and cruise missile developments as a means to intimidate neutral nations from moving into the American sphere of influence, either military or economic.

 

From that point on first the Army Air Force, later the newly independent Air Force and ultimately the CIA focused on the likelihood of mysterious aerial devices being related to potential Soviet psychological warfare.  When the “flying saucer” wave of 1947 hit the United States in 1947 the Air Force immediately enlisted the FBI in a search for potential Soviet agents as being a source for flying saucer reports. Over the years both the FBI and military intelligence groups covertly investigated individuals filing UFO reports (especially reports from military or national security installations). That was during an era of anti-communist concern in which loyalty oaths became common in government jobs and even for teachers.

There were concerns that communist agents, Soviet fellow travelers and even saboteurs might be involved in UFO reports. Official studies and assessments consistently discussed the danger represented by waves of false reports – such reports could undermine public confidence in the nation’s military,  create morale problems or in the worst case even divert attention from an actual preemptive Russian strike.

 

Were there people in civilian clothes and men in dark suits investigating people who made UFO reports, especially reports that involved any type of physical evidence – most definitely. Was there a perceived threat related to UFOs – absolutely.  But it wasn’t extra-terrestrial, it was most definitely earthly, and most likley Russian. Documents now available suggest that the suspicion of Russian involvement was so great that the initial Air Force UFO inquiry definitely expected to quickly identify the objects and connect them to Russian adaptation of German advanced technologies – and were frustrated and shocked when that didn’t happen.

 

By the time that attitude had become adjusted, the United States itself was on the way to developing its own advanced high speed and stratospheric aerial aircraft and balloon systems, under the highest levels of secrecy. At that point the second phase of the Russian fear kicked in – that of Soviet agents actually using UFO witnesses and most especially UFO interest groups as intelligence sources.  Initially the worry was that Russian agents would use the groups to spread rumors and fears and possibly trigger diversionary waves of sightings. Later, as groups began to actively scout for signs of UFOs, that fear evolved.

 

In the earliest years UFO groups were specifically called out as an intelligence threat and identified for special monitoring. Later as the groups became more organized and even began to deploy their instruments for their own observations a new concern was that they would observe secret aircraft and secret weapons systems under development. That could lead to disclosure of details pertaining not to alien craft but on classified projects – providing “open source” intelligence for the Soviets.

 

When evidence was discovered suggesting that Soviet agents were indeed following certain UFO groups, and that members of those groups were unknowingly collecting information on some of the most highly classified national weapons and communications projects, things got nasty. Counter intelligence moved to planting disinformation and sensationalizing discussions among the UFO community. Both types of mind games were carried out against the various individuals, very effectively. The net result certainly muddied the water in terms of foreign intelligence collection but it did so in a manner as to poison the information being circulated within the community for decades.

What’s In and What’s Not

 What is in the book, and what isn’t?  In my last post I talked a good deal about focus and hopefully it’s clear that the book is written from the perspective of the various levels of response to unidentified aerial objects that you find among intelligence groups – beginning at the unit and facility field intelligence level (related to immediate operational threats and security concerns) and moving up the ladder to broader national security concerns at headquarters levels and beyond.  Exactly why repeated and strongly expressed field concerns never penetrated to or produced tasking from the top of the national intelligence community is a major topic of the book.

Personalities, attitudes, career concerns, organization politics and institutional turf battles are all part of that story. There were senior military officers and senior intelligence personnel who were quite convinced that the there was something very anomalous in play and that national security was most definitely involved:

“Sightings of unidentified flying objects at great altitudes and traveling in the vicinity of major U.S. defense installations are of such a nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles.”

Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director, Office of Scientific Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, December, 1952

Yet systemic problems within the intelligence community were so great that in the end it proved impossible to even acknowledge the problem in terms of anything truly anomalous. As an example of how ludicrous that became, the following report was associated with a security warning defined only in terms of  “unidentified helicopters”:

“Malmstrom, AFB Montana received seven cuts on the height finder radar at altitudes between 9,500 and 15,500 feet…objects could not be intercepted…Four Strategic Air Command sites observed intercepting F-106’s arrive in the area; sighted objects turned their lights off on arrival of interceptors and back on upon their departure.”

National Military Command Center, Unidentified Sightings, November 8, 1975

Systemic failure in response to field security alerts is part of the story in Unidentified – but only part.

Another fundamental aspect of the problem was that the official investigating bodies literally failed to acknowledge and respond to hard physical data that was available to them. We know this today only because of the work of a body of extremely persistent researchers whose work has been almost totally overshadowed by the sensational UFO books of the recent years.

While Roswell has essentially dominated UFO literature for a good two decades, we now have records showing that in at least three instances UFO related materials were recovered and scientifically analyzed. The results from all three sets of tests were quite consistent – and surprising. Agencies including the FBI and senior Air Force and Army officers were well aware of the incidents, yet none of them appear to have drawn any serious attention by the official Air Force inquiries.

We also know that a constant complaint of those same inquiries was that they could not obtain instrumented measurements of UFO observations, especially of long duration observations including heights and speeds. Yet Air Force UFO project files disclose exactly such records, were made during a series of months long intrusions at one of the nation’s most sensitive atomic warfare facilities.

Unidentified highlights and provides detailed citations to a variety of similar, excellent research which had simply not received the attention that it should have, overwhelmed by a flood of books on reptilians, grays, alien treaties, secret space navy’s, classified penal colonies on other planets, hybrid alien/human breeding laboratories, and other similar subjects – and that gives you a clue as to what you will not find in this book. Oh, and no “channeling”, it’s just me here.

A Different UFO Book

I laid out my reasons for doing a UFO book in my last post, in this one I will turn to the “what” of the book.

First however, in the interest of time, if anyone reading this happens to be in Oklahoma, I will be doing a book discussion and signing at the Full Circle bookstore, at 50 Penn Place (across from Penn Square), beginning at 6:30 the evening of Wednesday, July 19.  I’d love to have company and it’s a fantastic venue; one of the nicest independent bookstores in the country.

So, what is different about this book?  The answer to that would be focus. It makes no attempt to cover the entire spectrum of the subject, instead it specifically addresses UFO incidents which were deemed to be of military/security interest and investigated as potential threats.  One of the long standing questions (suspicions) has been to what extent the military and the intelligence community took the subject seriously.  On the surface there are good reasons for the question since a great many public statements and official reports on UFO’s were quite questionable and at times simply not credible to the public…sometimes laughably so.

The good news is that we now have the documents to determine exactly how seriously threat related UFO reports were taken – at the various levels from field intelligence, to the responsible headquarters investigative groups, on to Pentagon level organizations and beyond.  Unidentified deals with that subject at great length, from World War II on-wards into the 1980s.  It also goes into extreme detail examining incidents related to the Atomic warfare complex – beginning as early as 1947.

While individual incidents of that nature have been discussed in UFO literature, Unidentified develops them from an evolutionary perspective, showing how the official government response shifted over time – and the extent to which it became both internally and externally disconnected.

It is only with that sort of extended chronological approach that patterns can be seen to develop, both in terms of the incidents themselves (which themselves evolved from sightings to intrusions and on to  something even more serious) as well as the actual security response. And it is with a study of the patterns, and their analysis, that Unidentified begins to differentiate itself.

Certainly others have raised the issue of a potential nuclear connection related to UFO incidents. What Unidentified does is to move that examination to a much finer level of “granularity” in evaluating the incidents and patterns, differentiating them not only in terms of targets, but in intensity, in timing and in operational attributes. Which is a wordy way of saying it evaluates them in terms of actual military activities and maps out trends in those activities over the study period.

It’s a technique variously referred to in the intelligence community as indications analysis and/or threat analysis – and in the private sector as strategic business analysis.  Patterns and trends are important and so is the concept of mapping the indicators to alternative competing hypotheses. That’s a practice which developed during the Cold War, referred to as ACH, which was developed to search out potential intentions of foreign powers whose motives were unclear and who often were clearly trying to conceal their actual activities and plans.

In Unidentified I use a matrix of four competing scenarios and test each one progressively throughout the entire thirty year study period.  That leads me to some pretty specific observations, not only in regard to intentions but also concerning exactly how and why the subject essentially defeated the national intelligence community.  It’s not a kind assessment but it does highlight some very pragmatic aspects of military and threat intelligence work – as well as offering some reasonably concrete opinions as to the reality of what was being reported.

More about what is in – and not in – the book in following posts.

A UFO Book?

With Unidentified now available in both Print and Kindle,

it’s time to answer a few questions and share some detail on my newest work.  For those familiar with my research and writing the first question might be – why a UFO book?  For others an equally good question might be why another UFO book?  After all there are already few hundred books dealing with the subject, with more constantly coming out.  Of course the same was true for books dealing with the Kennedy and King assassinations, albeit far fewer in regard to MLK Jr. Given that readers with an interest in UFOs may not be familiar with my work and my approach to books, the following will provide an introduction. In subsequent posts I’ll get more specific about the content of Unidentified and what makes it different from other books on the subject.

The answer to the basic questions of “why” is that Unidentified, like all my books – including November Patriots (a work of docufiction with former Dallas reporter Connie Kritzberg; still available on eBay) – did not actually begin as a book. It began as a historical question that I wanted to answer for myself.  Initially my questions had to do with the political assassinations of the 1960s. Luckily, as I began to have the time to seriously study those questions (and I can’t tell you how much of that was done carrying books and documents on airplanes during business travel) a tremendous number of documents and oral history material were becoming available. That allowed me to move into a level of detail in research that simply had not been possible in earlier decades. And in two instances, it led me to conclusions that were relatively unique – in contrast to much that had been written up to that point.

The result were lengthy and extensively cited books on the Kennedy and King assassinations. In the third instance, the assassination of RFK, the result was a virtually book length essay made available on the Mary Ferrell archive web site. In that case my research partner Stu Wexler and I could not satisfy ourselves sufficiently to move it to the level of a book, so we didn’t.

One of the fundamental lessons I learned in dealing with the political assassinations is that looking at events in isolation can be a mistake. It is critical to have a baseline when you are evaluating the activities of law enforcement agencies, intelligence agencies or even Congressional committees. The broader the experience, the easier it is to uncover what is unique and want is simply standard practice (or standard CYA for that matter). The same can be said for reading and interpreting agency and service documents, struggling though thousands of pages of CIA, FBI, and military documents fine tunes your appreciation for how things are actually recorded and communicated, including the not uncommon practices of obfuscation for purposes ranging from security to public relations.

That exposure also tweaked my interest in broader patterns, especially those related to questions pertaining to national security and military operations – another long time interest. And that lead to thousands of pages of more documents and to my studies of American covert and deniable warfare and the practices of high level command and control during crises.  I was interested to see how covert operations had evolved and how well they had worked – during the Cold War and following the attacks on America in 2001.  It proved to be an interesting enough story for a book (Shadow Warfare) and exposed several of the horrific inconsistencies that continue to plaque those operations even today. The study of national command authority and command and control contained in Surprise Attack proved to be equally disconcerting; it made me a lot more nervous than I had been and I felt compelled to surface the seemingly endemic issues – hence the book.

Fine, so what about UFOs, is he going to drag this on forever?  The answer is that I literally grew up with UFOs, the flying saucer wave of 1947 happened a few weeks after I was born and it was in the news from then on, you couldn’t escape it. It was intriguing, mysterious and the Air Force kept issuing highly questionable explanations for what was being reported – one more case of the government seeming to be in denial.

Of course if we had seen the internal documents of those early years at the time we would have known they were desperately trying to keep us calm – while they tried to get a handle what was undoubtedly happening.  So, one more Cold War mystery, one more area of skepticism about official story lines. And when I decided to take a look at it myself I found that some very dedicated researchers had used Freedom of Information Inquiries to pry out a huge trove of actual military and intelligence documents that simply were not being addressed in the increasingly sensational and speculative contemporary UFO books which had essentially taken over the subject.

My reaction was very much the same as it had been to the political assassinations, once I saw the depth of the actual historical data available I could not resist digging into it.  The only question was whether or not it would take me to an answer I would be comfortable with from a historical perspective – obviously it did, hence the book.

That’s the “why” of the book, the next post will begin to explore the “what”.   Oh, and if you haven’t read my other books and are unfamiliar with my obsession for detail, I suppose the length of this answer will give you a taste for that as well.

Warren Commission Disconnects

I’ll be back with more news on Unidentified and its availability (in both Kindle and Print) shortly, but this past week Chuck Ochelli invited Carmine Savastano and I back onto his program for another episode in our JFK 101 series.  We had a full two hours to dig into the fundamentals of the commission’s formation and its intrinsic weaknesses – some of which apply to any Presidential panel, especially as compared to an actual legal inquiry as might be conducted by the Justice Department or in particular by a Special Investigator empowered by the Justice Department.

We explored the standard problems and issues with the Warren Commission, as well as certain points which don’t get talked about much these days. However we also delved into the significant disconnects between its purported charter and how its work was actually conducted.

In the end we did a bit of a comparison between the Warren Commission and its “report” with the work of the HSCA – keeping in mind that the Warren Report was basically no more than a fleshing out and endorsement of the FBI report. Of course the FBI report itself was largely prepared over some three days and submitted within a couple of weeks and its “shooting scenario” actually conflicts with that of the Warren Report – but that was not obvious at the time since the FBI report was not made available to the public for comparative purposes.

We will be returning to the HSCA in a future show but the contrast in the two pieces of work is certainly dramatic.  The Warren Commission essentially certified the lone nut position of the FBI report (something internal FBI memos show was considered to be quite a challenge by the Bureau) while the HSCA submitted a conclusion of conspiracy and handed the matter to the Justice Department to pursue with the full weight of legal action – something Justice managed to totally dodge.

I think the dialog was quite educational; if it sounds interesting you can listen to it at the following link:

https://ochelli.com/thursday-62217-jfk-101-part-4-larry-hancock-carmine-savastano/

 

 

 

Unidentified interview

Well we are in the last stages of getting the book into print. I’ll leave it to your imagination what the galley proofing of a 465 page book involving  some fifty years of history and the extensive citation of military and intelligence documents involves. I wouldn’t recommend it for the faint of heart. Still looking for late June availability but it may be close to July.

In the meantime, I wanted to post an interview I did recently with my friend Doug of the Dallas Action.  We have talked before about the challenges of vetting sources, of historical analysis and exactly how far you can and cannot go out on limbs when you engage in that sort of thing.

If you have ever been interested in both political assassination, especially in the context of the JFK, RFK or MLK cases and in the subject of UFOs as well, you have likely noticed that there are similar challenges and similar pitfalls in both areas of interest. You find disconnects between internal inquiries and official public positions. You find obfuscation, diversions, outright hoaxes,  witness and source recall and vetting issues – and in both instances there are real world issues of classification, security and even counter intelligence activities.

After chatting a bit about Unidentified, Doug and I decided that it might be interesting to do a show about it but also to explore some of the crossover  (no I don’t mean “Dark Skies” …if you missed that TV series look it up on the internet, conspiracy television fiction at its best).  What I mean is crossover in terms of the challenges and how demanding it is to deal historically with subjects that many people consider “fringe” or worse and to do it in a manner which establishes some level of broader credibility.

If that sounds interesting, check out this link for the interview – and enjoy the burst of intense music that gets it going:

 

 

Gene Wheaton

Readers of Some Would Have Talked (2010) will be familiar with Wheaton and the implications of his information.  So will those who have attended my presentations or seen my blog posts on him.  Most recently, in 2016 at the JFK Lancer November in Dallas conference I presented my assessment of Wheaton as a source.  The points in that assessment are provided below.

The good news is that at long last, courtesy of Mark Sobel and Debra Conway, a very important interview with Mr. Wheaton is now available to all those interested.  The interview is on YouTube and the link to it is at the end of this vetting assessment.  As always comments and questions are welcome.

  • Wheaton provided information consisting of comments made by two individuals who he described as having information relating to individuals involved in the attack on JFK
  • While the men purportedly named individuals, or at least described them in some detail, the men themselves were not involved
  • One of the men had trained certain of the individuals during his work with the CIA as a military trainer and the second was a Cuban exile who had been in that training and personally knew some of the individuals involved in the attack
  • Wheaton provided no details, only named the two men and identified them as secondary sources in regard to a conspiracy
  • Wheaton provided corroborative documents demonstrating his personal association with both men during the time frame of the purported remarks they had made related to the events in Dallas
  • Wheaton did not add any further details over the time frame of his efforts to register his information – first with a Congressman and ultimately to the ARRB
  • Wheaton attempted to take his information to the government via a Congressperson as soon as he was aware of it
  • The timing of his contact with the two men is independently corroborated
  • Wheaton’s association with both men is corroborated
  • The two men’s backgrounds are corroborated as Wheaton described them
  • Independent – albeit anecdotal – information connected individuals associated with one of the men named by Wheaton as having knowledge of a conspiracy related to the attack on JFK – that information includes a call made by RFK the afternoon of the assassination
  • Wheaton took none of his information public and never expected his confidential contact with the ARRB to become public
  • Wheaton described the threats made to him if he did attempt to report his information even if only privately – primarily consisting of efforts to discredit him as a viable source
  • Efforts to discredit Wheaton can be corroborated
  • Wheaton later expended his own resources in an effort to bring his information to the ARRB, making multiple contacts and providing extensive documentation
  • The ARRB totally failed to pursue or even corroborate Wheaton’s information
  • The ARRB staff member handling Wheaton’s information resigned from the ARRB staff
  • When contacted several years later the staff member claimed not to have any memory at all of Wheaton, his documents or repeated contacts with him

The interview – conducted by William Law and produced by Mark Sobel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DPT9Oc0lsU&feature=youtu.be

Introducing “Unidentified”

 

It’s time to move forward to an introduction of my new book, which should be available this month (June). I’ll return to the topic of Russian covert political action – which is nothing new but is currently being treated in a fashion which undoubtedly has the entire intelligence community butting its head against the wall.  I don’t think I’ve ever seen the like of the current Executive and Congressional communities’ willful ignorance in regard to a subject of national security – especially from the political wing that used to dote on exactly these sorts of threats.

Strangely enough, I’ve still received no calls from either arm of government requesting my input so in the interim I’ll try to provide a bit better picture of what is in my newest work (some 455 pages of it), “Unidentified / The National Intelligence Challenge of UFOs”.  We have tried to capture the gist of it in the press release (which is still pending, held for actual availability).  To quote the release:

“There is simply no doubt that unidentified aerial objects were taken seriously by military intelligence.  Over some three decades both military and civilian intelligence groups used the standard methods of conventional and technical intelligence to resolve what was officially stated to be a serious security and air defense problem.  Those well-established methods failed, frustrating those involved in investigations and creating serious public relations and credibility problems for the U.S. Air Force. Ultimately the only solution to the UFO problem was to simply abandon it. In the end the intelligence challenge of highly anomalous “unknowns” – unconventional aerial objects internally and confidentially described in both Air Force and CIA reports as national security threats – had literally beaten the system.

Unidentified explores that intelligence failure, beginning during World War II and continuing over some three decades of official inquiries. It also profiles the events – including inter-service and inter-agency political posturing – which prevented the problem from being elevated to a level of true national security tasking. The ongoing Air Force decision to study the problem only at the level of individual incidents and the larger failure to task the broader intelligence community with a longer term, strategic analysis of security related UFO activities ensured that the fundamental problem was simply not addressed. The end result was nothing more than over a thousand highly unconventional and anomalous UFO reports officially classified and archived as “Unknowns”.

In Unidentified, Larry Hancock turns to the strategic intelligence practices – better known as indications analysis – that were not tasked to the national intelligence community. He presents a series of indications studies which suggest something very different from the official statement on UFOs officially offered by the Air Force. In these studies Unidentified examines and details patterns of UFO activity strongly suggesting that “unknown parties” actively probed America’s strategic military capabilities – at the same time demonstrating an undeniable ability to project force against the nation’s atomic warfighting complex. Beyond that, the operational patterns in the UFO activities revealed in the analysis also suggest a clear effort at “messaging”, one which appears to have failed.”

Now I have to say it’s not easy to capture the full content of this  book in three or four paragraphs of a press release. However I’ve just finished the first few interviews on it and one is already up on Facebook. The host did a wonderful job with it and I think it would give anyone a good feel for what I’m doing with Unidentified.  If you are interested take a listen:

https://youtu.be/EkPf32u-DQM

If you do, you’ll notice the host was very interested in a series of Air Force and CIA quotes I present and discuss in the book.  In my next post I will elaborate further on those and their significance.