(EST PUB DATE) CIA'S ROLE IN THE STUDY OF UFO'S, 1947-90, BY GERALD K. HAINES

• Document Type: FOIA
• Keywords: UFO SPECIAL COLLECTION
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 0005517742
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 18
• Document Creation Date: June 24, 2015
• Document Release Date: January 31, 2011
• Case Number: F-2010-00651
• Publication Date: July 1, 1999

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