by Michael E. Salla, PhD
Nov 15, 2005

from Exopolitics Website

 

Colonel Philip Corso has recently become a renewed focus of interest in the UFO community due to him being cited by a former Canadian Minister of Defense, Paul Hellyer, as a reliable source of UFO information. According to Hellyer, a retired US Air Force general confirmed Corso’s claims about extraterrestrial technologies described in his book The Day After Roswell.

 

Along with confirmation from other confidential ’official’ sources, Hellyer had the confidence to come forward to declare the existence of a high level government conspiracy to hide the truth about the UFO phenomenon and the extraterrestrial presence (see HERE).

 

Given his former cabinet level position in one of the Group of Eight nations, Hellyer’s claims of such a cover up are nothing short of breath taking. His public emergence at a symposium titled "Exopolitics Toronto" represents a powerful fissure in the so far monolithic silence by public officials over the preponderance of evidence supporting a "Cosmic Watergate".

In his speech, Hellyer discussed the profound policy implications of developing space weapons to target extraterrestrial visitors. Hellyer was opposed to what he perceived to be a U.S. military policy of depicting extraterrestrials as "the enemy", promoting the weaponization of space, and using advanced ’particle beam’ technologies to target extraterrestrial vehicles. He cited the lack of rigorous public debate over the merits of such a national security policy as a major objection to it being covertly put in place.

 

Hellyer’s approach, however, contrasts with Philip Corso’s own stated position on the merit of weaponizing space to deal with what Corso believed to be a genuine ’national security threat’ posed by extraterrestrials. This article will explore,

  • the reasons why Corso supported such a view of extraterrestrials as the enemy

  • whether extraterrestrials do genuinely pose a national security threat to the U.S. or other countries

  • the best response to Hellyer’s profound policy question concerning the weaponization of space and targeting of extraterrestrials

In his book, The Day After Roswell, co-authored with William Birnes, Corso declared that extraterrestrials were abducting civilians, violating U.S. airspace, and destroying aircraft sent to intercept them. He viewed the extraterrestrials as a direct threat to U.S national security and declared:

"For over fifty years, now, the war against UFOs has continued as we tried to defend ourselves against their intrusions"

(The Day After Roswell, p. 290).

Elsewhere in The Day After Roswell, Corso describes the national security threat posed by UFOs and the need for a military weaponization program to target and shoot down UFOs conducting such violations. He specifically championed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) as the appropriate response to extraterrestrial intrusions, and that the US and USSR both knew what SDI’s true purpose was:

We [US & USSR] both knew who the real targets of SDI were… It was the UFOs, alien spacecraft thinking themselves invulnerable and invisible as they soared around the edges of our atmosphere, swooping down at will to destroy our communications with EMP bursts, buzz our spacecraft, colonize our lunar surface, mutilate cattle in their own horrendous biological experiments, and even abduct human beings for their medical tests and hybridization of the species.

 

And what was worse we had to let them do it because we had no weapons to defend ourselves

(The Day After Roswell, p. 292)

A number of UFO researchers have claimed that these anti-extraterrestrial statements were introduced by Corso’s co-author William Birnes, and that Corso was not as anti-extraterrestrial as The Day After Roswell suggests. Unfortunately, that is not accurate as a reading of Col Corso’s original notes make clear.

 

These were published in Italian as L’Alba Di Una Nuova Era (Dawn of a New Age, 2003) and contain many similar statements revealing the depth of Corso’s animosity towards visiting extraterrestrials. For example, in terms of violating U.S. air space, Corso wrote:

"They have violated our air space with impunity and even landed on our territory. Whether intentional or not, they have performed hostile acts. Our citizens have been abducted and killed"

(Dawn of a New Age, p. 77).

Significantly, Corso goes on to make the following startling claim about the extraterrestrial visitors:

"The above are acts of war which we would not tolerate from any worldly source. It also appears they do not tolerate any such acts on our parts on their bases."

(Dawn of a New Age, p. 77).

Corso in The Day After Roswell described extraterrestrial bases on the moon, the implication here is that the extraterrestrials also have bases on the Earth, and the U.S. government was powerless to monitor these bases.

Corso went on to fully describe the nature of the interaction between extraterrestrial visitors and the general population:

... the aliens have shown a callous indifference concerning their victims. Their behavior has been insidious and it appears they might be using our earth and manipulating earth life. Skeptics will excuse them that possibly they are benevolent and want to help, however, there is no evidence they have healed anyone or alleviated human ailments. On the other hand, they have caused pain, suffering and even death

(Dawn of a New Age, p. 98).

In terms of cooperation between the US and Russia (former USSR) to deal with the extraterrestrials, Corso wrote:

"The U.S. and USSR are aligning their space programs against a common enemy."

[Dawn of a New Age, 78]

Consequently, it can be concluded that there is no ambiguity in Corso’s belief that extraterrestrials are a genuine threat to US. national security and the weaponization of space was an urgent policy priority to deal with the "extraterrestrial enemy".

 

If alive today, Corso would no doubt be a strong supporter of the current U.S Air Force plans to weaponize space and build a global defense shield that could target extraterrestrial visitors (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0518-02.htm). In short, Corso has consistently demonstrated strong support for military solutions to the presence of visiting extraterrestrials that in his view were performing abductions and other ’intrusive activities’ that posed a direct threat to U.S. national security.

 

The question that can now be raised is whether extraterrestrials do genuinely pose a national security threat to the U.S. or the earth more generally. This question is made very complex by the amount of conflicting data on the extraterrestrial presence from a variety of whistleblower and witness sources whose testimony is more difficult to verify when compared to the case of Corso.

 

Answering such a policy question first requires that one understand the nature of the "national security threat" posed by extraterrestrials. Second, one needs to identify any groups of extraterrestrials that may be performing intrusive actions that fall into the category of ’threat’. Finally, one has to identify extraterrestrials performing non-intrusive activities that do not appear to be a threat to the national security of the U.S. or other countries.

There is considerable evidence that the U.S. has entered into a series of technology exchange agreements with a limited number of extraterrestrial races, and we need to understand the nature of these agreements to identify the possible threat posed by extraterrestrials (see HERE).

 

A number of alleged whistleblowers such as Charles Hall, Michael Wolf, Daniel Burisch, Clifford Stone, Phil Schneider, William Cooper, etc., describe the various agreements reached with extraterrestrials that they saw direct evidence of during their participation in projects or assignments with the highest possible security classifications.

 

Furthermore, there is considerable circumstantial and testimonial evidence pointing to President Eisenhower being actively involved in meeting with and reaching agreements with extraterrestrial races (see HERE). Col Corso himself alludes to such agreements reached by the Eisenhower administration in various passages in the Day After Roswell. For example, he wrote:

"We had negotiated a kind of surrender with them [extraterrestrials] as long as we couldn’t fight them. They dictated the terms because they knew what we most feared was disclosure."

(p. 292).

Extraterrestrials that have entered into these agreements have performed activities in the form of abductions, genetic experiments and aerial surveillance that lead to great suspicion as to their ultimate agenda. Corso repeatedly pointed out that such intrusive actions amounted to an act of war and justified a concerted military response by U.S. authorities. It needs to be pointed out that prior to these alleged agreements, most human-extraterrestrial interactions appeared to be of the benevolent ’space brother’ category that emerged in the 1950’s.

 

Contactees’ such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry and others claimed to have been exposed to a variety of positive extraterrestrial experiences that inspired a rapid growth in public interest in the benevolent ’space brothers’. (See HERE)

 

There is reason to believe that the abduction phenomenon that began with the 1961 Betty and Barney Hill case was a direct result of alleged agreements reached with extraterrestrials. That is not to say that abductions didn’t happen before the agreements, but that the agreements enabled the abductions to increase at a rate which went far beyond whatever the government authorities responsible for these originally intended.

The government authority responsible for such agreements owes its origins to the Majestic-12 control group created by President Truman on September 24, 1947 to deal with the UFO phenomenon. Due to its clandestine nature and unaccountable status, this government entity responsible for UFO affairs is often referred to as the ’secret government’. President Clinton when asked by famed Washington Post correspondent Sarah McClendon why he didn’t do more to have the truth about UFOs disclosed, he allegedly confided:

"Sarah, there’s a secret government within the government, and I don’t control it" (See HERE)

The ’secret government’ is the government within the government that controls and makes policy decisions over how to deal with extraterrestrials; whether they constitute a ’threat’ or not; and develops agreements with some extraterrestrial races.

There is intense debate over whether extraterrestrials involved in abductions (typically described as ’Grays’ from Zeta Reticulum) have a covert ’take-over’ agenda. Researchers such as Dr David Jacobs (author of The Threat) believe the ’Grays’ have a covert plan to take-over human society by engineering a superior hybrid race. On the other hand, researchers such as Dr John Mack (author of Passport to the Cosmos) believes the star visitors have a ’transformative’ agenda designed to blend together the best characteristics of extraterrestrials and humanity.

 

While this is an important debate, it glosses over one of the key features of the extraterrestrial presence - the classified agreements reached with the ’secret government’. Without taking sides in the ’transformative’ vs. ’take-over’ debate, I believe it vital to consider all the data and come up with a nuanced response that takes into account different extraterrestrial races performing activities. I have argued elsewhere that extraterrestrials can be distinguished on the basis of them either being inside or outside the secret network of agreements reached with secret government authorities (see HERE).

The key policy issue is not whether we should establish communication with extraterrestrials to resolve differences that lead to confrontations over the number of abductions or other intrusive activities reported by Corso and others; but the precise nature of the agreements reached with extraterrestrials, and how these are conducted in covert and unaccountable manner. As far as the abduction phenomenon is concerned, it is very likely that these were made possible by, or accelerated as a result of, secret agreements by secret government authorities with one or more extraterrestrial races.

The national security threat posed by extraterrestrials is a covert one that exists through the classified agreements established by the secret government with some extraterrestrial races. The motivation of extraterrestrials that have entered into these agreements is very questionable and gives considerable cause for suspicion as to their overall intent.

 

Certainly the great number of abductions that have occurred give rise to the ’take over’ scenario promoted by Jacobs and other researchers. Once one considers the vast secret infrastructure created to develop extraterrestrial technologies and the illicit funding required for such an infrastructure (see HERE), it is clear that the national security threat posed by extraterrestrials is INTERNAL rather than EXTERNAL. Corso’s depiction of extraterrestrials as an external military threat to the U.S. is therefore not accurate.

Extraterrestrials that have entered into agreements with secret government authorities are complicit in the creation of national security system based on secrecy, unaccountability and illicit funding. This directly threatens US. national security both in terms of a covert take-over by extraterrestrials, and an erosion of the constitutional principles upon which the U.S. is based. The real national security threat posed by some extraterrestrial visitors is a result of the desire of the ’secret government’ to acquire and develop extraterrestrial technologies at any cost, even if it means giving permission to a limited number of abductions.

On the other hand, extraterrestrials who have not entered into such technology exchange agreements with secret government authorities have behaved in ways that display great consideration and benevolence towards humanity. This is evidenced in the extensive number of contacteé or ’space brother’ reports from the 1950’s, right up to the modern era with alleged contacteés such as Billy Meier, Sixto Paz Wells, Carlos Diaz, etc. These extraterrestrials reflect great respect for human free will and follow what appears to be a clear directive for non-interference.

 

Extraterrestrials that are trying to assist humanity, as described by these alleged contacteés, are secretly being targeted by space weapons in order to capture their technology or the EBEs themselves. This also includes some of the Grays from Zeta Reticulum involved in abductions that are included among the extraterrestrial races secretly targeted as whistleblowers such as Clifford Stone point out (see HERE). It does appear that the relationship between the Grays and the 'secret government’ is a complex one where some whistleblowers report on military confrontations between them in terms of the extent to which either or both have violated the terms of their secret agreements.

In terms of the weaponization of space and SDI, the deliberate targeting of extraterrestrial visitors who are attempting to establish communications and contact with an extensive number of civilians needs to be rigorously debated. This requires putting to a stop the current U.S. policy of targeting extraterrestrial vehicles.

 

As Hellyer pointed out in his September speech:

"Are they really enemies or merely legitimate explorers from afar?" (see HERE)  

What makes this policy issue complex from the perspective of whistleblowers such as Corso, who is representative of many military officials briefed about the extraterrestrial presence, is that they believe that such a militaristic policy is appropriate. This policy is justified, in Corso’s and other military officials’ views, on the basis of the extensive abductions that are happening, and other extraterrestrial intrusions that are occurring.

The abduction phenomenon needs to be understood in terms of the classified agreements reached between the ’secret government’ and extraterrestrials, and their respective hidden agendas. I consider it very plausible that there are various factions, both human and non-human, that want to create as much misunderstanding and conflict as possible between the U.S. military and different extraterrestrial races.

 

It should be pointed out that military officials such as Corso did not appear to be briefed about friendly extraterrestrials and the latter’s non-intrusive activities. Instead, Corso was given information on abduction related activities and other extraterrestrial intrusions that create the psychological framework for the creation of ’enemy images’ (or ’enmification’) as pointed out by Sam Keen in his important book Faces of the Enemy (see: http://www.classroomtools.com/faces.htm).

 

In short, what we have been seeing over the last 50 years or so is an ’enmification process’ whereby an extraterrestrial enemy can be constructed that justifies the creation of SDI and the weaponization of space. This takes us to the warnings of Dr Carol Rosin and Dr Steven Greer about a contrived extraterrestrial threat being the basis of a public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence (see HERE).

Consequently, in response to the profound policy question raised by Hellyer of whether weaponization of space and the development of SDI is an appropriate policy response to the extraterrestrial presence, the answer is NO. There is no need for a military response to the extraterrestrial presence since it is clear that extraterrestrials who pose a credible ’national security threat’ do so by virtue of their involvement in a series of secret agreements that make possible a covert take over of the vast infrastructure of extraterrestrial related projects that exist in the U.S., and other countries. This covert extraterrestrial threat requires a POLITICAL solution rather than a MILITARY solution - public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence.

With public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence, there can be the necessary transparency and accountability to ensure that any technology exchange agreements with extraterrestrials are conducted in a responsible way, and do not make human society prone to a covert ’take-over’ by extraterrestrials that operate in a clandestine manner.

 

It is very likely that the abduction phenomenon would cease to be a problem once transparency and accountability were brought into play. Extraterrestrial visitors performing such activities could be closely monitored and persuaded from continuing any activities that violated individual human rights. ’Persuasive mechanisms’ would come in a variety of ways: rigorous public debate over extraterrestrial races; educating extraterrestrials about human rights standards; and the anticipated support of many extraterrestrial races in monitoring and countering violations by other extraterrestrial races.

The Honorable Paul Hellyer called for an urgent public debate over the appropriateness of current military policies directed towards extraterrestrial visitors. The current policy advocated by Philip Corso of weaponizing space through SDI and targeting extraterrestrial vehicles, is supported by many former and current military officials ’in the loop’ about the extraterrestrial presence. The development and use of space based military weapons against extraterrestrial visitors will be shown to be a poor policy choice once the true history of ’secret government’ and extraterrestrial agreements are revealed.

 

As a former Minister of Defense, Paul Hellyer is very familiar with the importance of policy questions concerning the use of military weapons in resolving international political problems.

 

He is to be congratulated on bringing to the public’s attention the "profoundly important policy questions that must be addressed" with regard to the weaponization of space and the alleged targeting of extraterrestrial visitors.

 

 


 

From: Dr Michael Salla
Date: 11/09/05 05:15:04
To: exopolitics@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [exopolitics] Paul Hellyer and the Politics of Exopolitics

Aloha,

here’s a very well written article on the impact of the former Canadian Defense Minister, Paul Hellyer, coming forward with his belief in a decades long conspiracy to cover up the UFO phenomenon.

Hellyer’s emergence is significant for a number of reasons.

  • First, as a former senior politician he will have significant influence with the current cadre of Canadian politicians who begin to think about the UFO phenomenon. Having a senior politician come forward to declare his views based on his own significant political career, will help shape the views of others who seriously question what has been Canada’s official UFO policy.
     

  • Second, Hellyer relied on none other than Philip Corso to come forward with his views. Corso’s testimony was confirmed by Hellyer’s confidential conversation with a retired USAF general who said that everything Corso claimed was true and more. This certainly adds to weight of evidence supporting Corso’s testimony in terms of official documents putting him in the key positions he claimed to have served in.
     

  • Third, Hellyer demonstrates the approach that many senior politicians will take to the UFO phenomenon. They are not likely to be impressed by the data base of UFO sightings accumulated by many UFO researchers, but are more likely to be convinced by the testimony of a whistleblower whose identity is informally confirmed through one’s system of contacts. This in my view points to emergence of exopolitics as the more suitable approach to the indisputable government cover up of UFO data and the ETH.

I think that the issue of whistleblower testimony again emerges as an important source of data since senior politicians are likely to give more credence to their inside contacts verifying whistleblower testimony than what is reported in the mass media concerning UFO sightings. If there is one or more retired USAF generals saying off the record to senior politicians that Corso was genuine, this will silently continue to shape perceptions of politicians courageious enough to inquire about the UFO phenomenon. Hellyer is the first of many politicians who will openly come forward to support many views that are at the heart of the exopolitics approach.

In peace

Michael E. Salla, PhD
 

 

Paul Hellyer and the Politics of Exopolitics
by Gord Heath
Nov 5, 2005

from UFOBC Website

Paul Hellyer
Former Canadian Minister of Defence
 

Paul Hellyer, a former Minister of Defense in the Pearson Government, has announced his belief that UFOs are real and that the US is developing weapons systems for space which are to be used against alien craft entering earth’s airspace. He voiced his opinions at the recent "2005 Toronto Exopolitics Symposium". Exopolitics is a new term used to describe the study of the politics of extraterrestrial contact.

 

It is usually discussed in a context which assumes that enough evidence exists from existing UFO reports to conclude that some UFOs are craft that are piloted by beings originating from other planets and solar systems. Hellyer’s comments received some coverage in the national media and stirred some interest and reaction from the public, mostly from those who have some interest in UFOs.
 


Hellyer’s History as Political Nomad
Paul Hellyer was first elected as a Liberal from Toronto’s Davenport riding in 1949. He was, at that time, the youngest MP to serve in Canada’s parliament. He served as a parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defense and then went on to serve as the Associate Minister of Defense in the cabinet of Prime Minister Louis Saint-Laurent. He later served as Minister of National Defense in Prime Minister Pearson’s cabinet in the mid 1960s and served as Minister of Transport in the cabinet of Prime Minister Trudeau.

 

His most notable and controversial achievement was the integration and unification of Canada’s army, navy and air forces into a single organization, the Canadian Forces. At the time, unification sparked considerable negative reaction from many members of the armed forces who objected to the manner in which military traditions such as separate and unique uniforms were discarded.

After resigning from cabinet in a dispute with Trudeau, Hellyer sat as an independent and later formed a political party, the Action Canada Party, before crossing to join the Progressive Conservative Party. He failed in a run for the leadership of the PCs before leaving that party to rejoin the Liberals where he failed to secure a nomination. He later went on to form the Canadian Action Party in 1995.

In terms of influence, the peak of his political career was probably in his earlier years when he served as a cabinet minister. His political views gravitated towards concerns about the threats to Canada’s sovereignty posed by US political and economic influence in Canadian affairs. In recent years he is one of many prominent Canadians who have opposed Canadian support and participation in the US National Missile Defense program (NMD) and supported calls for a ban on weapons in space.

It is through these contacts that he began to encounter the views of persons who believe that the US is planning space based weapons systems to be deployed against ET controlled vehicles entering earth’s atmosphere from space.

Paul Hellyer states that his beliefs in ET visitation do not relate back to insider knowledge obtained from his time spent as Minister of National Defense from 1963 to 1967. At that time he was largely consumed by other pressing public policy priorities and paid scant attention to high profile UFO encounters like the Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia incident in October 1967 or the Falcon Lake, Manitoba encounter in May 1967 where Stephen Mickalak received chest burns from a hovering UFO.
 


Roswell Writings Change Hellyer’s Views
Hellyer states his recent interest in UFOs was prompted by viewing Peter Jennings TV documentary on the topic. He later read "The Day After Roswell" by Col. Philip J. Corso, who once served as the head of the Foreign Technology Desk at the US Army’s Research and Development department. In his book, Corso asserts that parts from a crashed alien vehicle were recovered from the July 1947 incident at Roswell, New Mexico which the US Army Air Force later explained as a weather balloon.

 

Corso states some parts were transferred to a "file cabinet" at the Pentagon where they were used to guide developments in several technologies such as integrated circuits, night vision systems and lasers.

Col. Philip John Corso
Author of controversial book, "The Day After Roswell"
 

Many UFOlogists dispute conclusions that a UFO crashed at Roswell, New Mexico in 1947. Others do not believe Corso’s specific allegations in his book relating to his role in applying ET derived technologies from this alleged crashed UFO to practical recent technological innovations. Stanton Friedman is a nuclear physicist who investigated Roswell and has books about the Roswell crash and MJ-12, the alleged top secret US committee created to study UFOs.

 

Friedman, who now resides in New Brunswick, casts doubts on Corso’s claims that he was the central figure responsible for seeding technology derived from wreckage taken from the ET spaceship which (allegedly) crashed at Roswell. In response to those who question how he came to believe the contents of this specific book, Hellyer states that he personally spoke with an unnamed US General who assured him that all of this and more was true.
 


Exopolitics Versus the UFO Fundamentalists
For some UFOlogists, Hellyer’s foray into Exopolitics was not welcomed. The very notion of a study of the politics of extraterrestrial contact is hotly contested by many as they feel that UFOlogists must focus on the scientific investigation of UFO phenomena. Some reason that there is insufficient evidence to conclude that some UFOs may be vehicles incorporating technology far beyond those developed by earth civilization.

The reality is that all of this is mostly a debate happening amongst a very small group of researchers and interested persons that has little measurable impact on the information shared through mass media outlets like television, radio and newspapers.

There are few celebrities of any sort who want to risk their profile and public following to publicly state their views on the possible importance posed by UFO encounters, especially if some have extraterrestrial origins. Few politicians have been brave enough to face the ridicule posed by suggesting there might be anything worthwhile to gain through the study of UFOs. President Carter and President Reagan both spoke about personal UFO encounters but made few other public statements about the policy implications posed by these events.

It might be expected that any viewpoint supporting the possible reality of ET visitation to the planet might be welcomed by those UFOlogist’s who claim to be open to this possibility. But due to deep divisions between some UFOlogists and persons who advance the study of exopolitics, this has not been the case.

As an example, Paul Hellyer’s statements to the Exopolitics conference in Toronto were mocked and ridiculed by filmmaker Paul Kimball of Redstar Films based in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Kimball’s views are of some significance as he is one of the few Canadians to have an interest and financial stake in producing documentary films on UFO related topics. His documentaries include "Stanton T. Friedman IS Real" and "Do You Believe in Majic?" He is currently working on film documentaries on cattle mutilations and the ten best UFO cases.
 


Kimball Believes Hellyer Should Have Known UFO Secrets
 

Paul Kimball
UFO Documentary Filmmaker
 

One of Kimball’s posts on his weblog "The Other Side of Truth" was largely focused on heaping scorn on Hellyer’s nomadic political career "Ladies and Gentlemen – Meet the REAL Paul Hellyer". His earlier post on Hellyer "Paul Hellyer – The Big Fish Flops" raised more specific issues relating to Hellyer’s statement. Kimball’s opinion is that if anyone would know about UFO secrets, it would have been Hellyer:

"Because if anyone in Canada would have known about the Cosmic Watergate, and UFO secrets, and alien bases, etc. etc., it would have been the Minister of National Defense in the mid 1960s."

This statement assumes that the Minister of National Defense is privy to all secrets contained within the Department of National Defense. It further assumes that any questions concerning the security implications of UFO incursions into Canadian air space would require a continuing policy review from the Minister of National Defense. What if Canadian policy on the security implications of UFOs was already determined by our participation in NORAD continental air defense, established back in the early 1950s?
 


US Policy Was to Debunk UFOs
There is documentation to suggest that there was considerable concern about the possible security risks posed by UFOs during the early post World War 2 time period.

 

The US Air Force initiated several studies of UFOs to evaluate the potential threat to national security. It was initially thought that the UFOs might be secret weapons produced by Germany or the Soviet Union. It was later determined that the UFOs were not foreign developed weapons systems and one study in the US Air Force concluded some UFOs possibly had an "interplanetary origin".

 

In his UFO books, Major Donald Keyhoe documented the struggle in the US Air Force between those who favored open sharing and disclosure of UFO information with the public and "the silence group" who feared that the public was not prepared for this information and wanted to keep all unsolved reports secret.

The CIA sponsored Robertson Panel Report in 1953 appears to have set the policy direction for US government agencies including intelligence and military agencies regarding UFOs. It suggested that the credible UFO reports should be debunked, that only reports of easily explainable occurrences of meteors and such should be publicized, and that the activities of civilian UFO study groups should be monitored.

 

It was concluded that there was no evidence that UFOs posed a specific security threat to the US, but that the reporting of UFOs might trigger the mass hysteria that was observed following the radio broadcast of "The War of the Worlds". The panel felt that the mass media could be used to discredit UFO sightings. It was also concluded that there was no evidence that UFOs were actually advanced vehicles piloted by beings from other planets.

The official study of UFOs by the US Air Force did continue through Project Blue Book until the 1968 University of Colorado "Condon Committee Report" advised that Blue Book should be shutdown as there was nothing further to be gained from the study of UFOs. But even though Project Blue Book continued through the 1950s to the late 1960s, it was largely ineffectual in conducting serious research into UFOs and its direction was largely to abide by the policy framework established through the Robertson Panel Report.

The more serious and contentious question is whether some persons connected with the study of UFOs decided to continue studies in a compartmentalized and secret organization and program. Those who support this view refer to documentation suggesting such a group, possibly called MJ-12, has been operating in the US since the late 1940s or early 1950s.

 

A key contention is that the existence of this organization and its activities are hidden behind walls of internal security from any and all elected and publicly accountable officials such as presidents, cabinet members, senators and members of congress. This secrecy is allegedly maintained by threats and intimidation. While some information does leak out, it is countered by the deliberate leakage of "disinformation" which masks the truth behind many seemingly related but false or partially false allegations.

Some theorists believe that some of the information about these programs is released in a controlled manner to eventually prepare the public for a broader and more open disclosure of the real history of UFO studies.
 


What About Canada?
Did Canada have an active UFO study program in the mid-sixties? Did the Canadian government ever formally establish a policy direction concerning the potential national security implications posed by UFOs?

While there has certainly been many UFO encounters involving RCAF aircraft and radar installations, there does not seem to exist a paper trail showing the policy direction that guided reaction to these events. The RCAF did perform some study of UFO incidents, but there is not any clear indication of the policy objective that framed this study. It is quite possible that the elected arm of the Canadian government, the PMO and cabinet, have never prepared a policy directive concerning the study of and response to UFO incidents.

 

Perhaps there has never been sufficient pressure to require a government policy response. Perhaps government bureaucracy including National Defense has preferred to set their own internal policy. The media has largely ignored reporting of UFO events since the 1950s and the public is itself fragmented by differing belief systems and focused on more tangible and immediate priorities.

In Canada, the study of UFOs was offloaded to the National Research Council in 1968, the year that the US disbanded the USAF "Project Blue Book" study of UFOs. There were few scientists at NRC who harboured any willingness to show interest in the objective study of a "frivolous topic" like UFOs, except for the purposes of finding and locating fallen meteorites. The timing of the offload of UFO study responsibility suggests that Canada was simply following the US lead in its policy towards the study of UFOs.

Since the mid 1950s, Canada has participated in NORAD which provides security of Canadian and US air space from foreign incursions. The response to any unidentified return that shows up on NORAD radar systems would abide by the policies and regulations established by the joint US and Canadian NORAD command structure. It is therefore quite likely that our response to UFOs detected by the military would abide by NORAD policies which are likely largely developed by US military strategists.

It is theoretically possible that the US has actually discouraged Canadian government research into UFOs because they might be concerned that the results of such studies might be released to the public or may be obtained by competing foreign governments.
 


There Never Was a Project Magnet
It is difficult to catch Paul Kimball’s line of reasoning on Hellyer. Apparently he sees Hellyer’s disclosure that as a defense minister, he knew little or nothing about UFOs as proof positive that the Canadian government has never had an interest in UFOs. He might be right that most people in government were at most puzzled by what they heard. But there were certainly some people in the Canadian military that had to be concerned about what was reported by pilots and radar observers in various military encounters with UFOs.

Kimball goes on to say "There was no super secret Wilbert Smith research project" in his efforts to debunk the notion that the Canadian government ever had any interest in studying UFOs. The project he is referring to is "Project Magnet", a program run by Department of Transport scientist, Wilbert Smith.

The project was concerned with the idea that the earth’s magnetic field might be the force used by the flying saucers for their propulsion. It later led to a small UFO detection station at Shirley Bay near Ottawa, Ontario. Project Magnet was funded by government from 1950 to 1954 and the UFO detection station was publicly funded from 1952 to 1954. Although the project was supposedly secret, the UFO detection station was written about in several newspaper articles.

 

It appears that publicity surrounding the station possibly contributed to the government’s decision in 1954 to discontinue funding for the project.

Flying Saucer Detection Station at Shirley Bay near Ottawa
This photograph was published in the Toronto Globe and Mail,

on the same day as a USAF F-89 disappeared after merging

with a UFO on radar in Canadian air space over Lake Superior.
 

Paul Kimball goes on to state "There was no secret plan to get an alien spacecraft to land in Alberta". I guess the point here is to disprove any notion that the Canadian military had any interest in the UFO phenomena. Here Kimball must be referring to the article printed in the Ottawa Journal in July 1967, "UFO Landing Site was 13 Year Secret". The article states,

"The Canadian Government 13 years ago made available the defense research board experimental station at Suffield, Alberta as a landing site for Unidentified Flying Objects, defense minister Paul Hellyer has now disclosed."

The article goes on to state:

"Nothing ever materialized from that top secret project. No extraterrestrial flying objects ever sought to land on that 1000 square mile restricted tract of land over which no aircraft, civilian or military, was allowed to fly without special permission. The idea behind the classified project was that if any UFO tried to make contact with earth it could land at the DRB station without being shot down by defense interceptors."

CFB Suffield

This Canadian Forces Base is located northwest of Medicine Hat, Alberta. For decades it was Canada’s primary research centre into chemical and biological weapons. It is also alleged to have been designated as a top secret reserved "UFO landing site" back in the early 1950s.
 

Yurko Bondarchuk refers to the alleged site in his 1979 book "UFO Sightings, Landings and Abductions – The Documentary Evidence". He revealed that Captain Douglas Caie, Public Information Officer from National Defense Headquarters in Ottawa stated regarding the alleged UFO landing site at Suffield,

"We have no record of any such program… From the information I have, we never had one."

According to the 1973 book "Aliens from Space" by Donald Keyhoe, US Air Force intelligence learned of the restricted landing site at Suffield in 1954. According to Keyhoe, the site was established when efforts by the RCAF to "bring down" a UFO failed. The intent was to lure the aliens into landing but there was apparently nothing to indicate the area was reserved for alien machines.

In the 1950s through to the 1970s, the experimental station at Suffield was Canada’s main centre for research into chemical and biological WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). This included the testing of mustard gas and sarin on soldiers and other human test subjects. Suffield was also the primary Canadian test site for biological weapons such as anthrax, plague, ricin and botulinum toxin. It is also alleged that the RCAF has engaged in many pursuits of UFOs with its fighter jets since the 1950s. It is perhaps little wonder that the UFOs would not choose to land at a site controlled by Canadian National Defense which is devoted to chemical and biological weapons research.

What was the source for this story? Why would the government designate a military base as a "safe landing site" for UFOs?
 


AFFA and PONNAR Orbit Earth and Make Contact
What I have found quite interesting about this, aside from Kimball’s denials, is the whole history of Smith as it relates to Canada’s UFO studies of that period. While investigating this whole episode of the alleged UFO landing site at Suffield, I was quite surprised to find out that there might be a connection between this "bit of Canadian UFO fantasy" and our favourite UFO/ET proponent, Wilbert Smith. This story goes back to a UFO researcher named Grant Cameron.

 

Through his interest of the alleged alien landing site at Suffield, he engaged Hellyer in a long period of correspondence with the purpose of locating certain information about the site. Grant Cameron wrote Hellyer several times in the 1970s, trying to determine the identity of the top defense department official who had revealed the existence of the secret Suffield "UFO landing site". Hellyer was never able to recall the name of the official, but told Cameron that he had searched his files at National Archives but was unable to locate his UFO file, which apparently contained notes from defense briefings on UFOs.

The story does not stop there however. Cameron states that in 1978 he interviewed Wilbert Smith’s widow and asked her if she remembered anything about the Suffield UFO landing site. In her version of the story, her husband had been making efforts to convince government officials that the aliens existed and that they should make efforts to talk to them face to face, to learn who they were and what they wanted.

Wilbert Smith
Canadian radio scientist and prominent "UFO Contactee"

ran Project Magnet and UFO Detection Station for the federal government.
 

Here the story begins to get very weird. In August 1954, the technology publication "Aviation Week and Space Technology" reported that Dr. Lincoln LaPaz was conducting a study of two "satellites" which had been recently discovered orbiting the earth at 400 miles and 600 miles above the surface. According to the article, the satellites had caused worries in the Pentagon as they were initially believed to be artificial. This was three years before the Soviet Union launched "Sputnik" the first human manufactured artificial satellite into orbit. The story was subsequently covered by several newspapers.

Some people believed that the two mystery satellites were alien spaceships. One of these people was a Mrs. Frances Swan, who lived in Eliot, Maine. She claimed that beginning in April 1954 she began receiving channelled messages from the commanders of two alien ships orbiting the earth, AFFA who commanded ship M-4 and PONNAR who commanded ship L-11. For some reason or another, AFFA was the main alien contact for Swan and other contacteés.

 

Wilbert Smith, who was a strong believer in aliens, maintained contact with Swan and other "AFFA" contacteés. He also allegedly tried alternative methods for establishing contact with AFFA on his own or through various intermediaries.
 


Back to the story of the Suffield UFO landing site
Mrs. Smith told Grant Cameron that Wilbert believed that if the government stopped shooting at UFOs, then he might be able to get spaceship commander AFFA to land for a meeting.

 

Apparently AFFA had given this indication in a contact to Swan. Smith indicates that he approached a top secret committee in government to relay this request and they had agreed to allow AFFA a safe place to land. When Smith relayed this agreement back to AFFA, he was told that AFFA would also require assurances that he would also be free to take off without any interference. According to Cameron, Mrs. Smith told him that the top secret committee would not agree to this, and so the landing never took place.

As weird as this story is, it is at least partially true. We know that Wilbert Smith was "a UFO contacteé" and a "true believer" that some of the UFOs were spaceships flown by aliens. Mr. Smith really did receive government funding for his "Project Magnet" and the "UFO Detection Station" at Shirley’s Bay. We know that Paul Hellyer did apparently reveal that Suffield Research Station had been designated as a top secret UFO landing site sometime back in the mid-1950s. His statement revealing this site was apparently made when he attended the official opening of the "UFO Landing Pad" in St. Paul, Alberta, which was a community project for Canada’s centennial.

From Mrs. Smith’s telling, the aliens never landed because the Canadian government wouldn’t consent to granting the commander permission to freely leave. What Hellyer was told and what was in his notes seems forgotten and lost with his vanished UFO file. The Suffield story seems to at least be partially true and it would be fascinating to know the complete real story behind it.

From what we know sitting in our stuffy armchairs reading these stories and perhaps getting a good chuckle or two, is that AFFA and PONNAR appear to have left earth orbit, probably not impressed with the diplomacy extended by the Canadian government of that time.
 


Present Media Climate Discourages Interest in UFO Study
It is difficult to assess what impact Hellyer’s comments have had on the Canadian public. I have had a few people mention to me that they had heard something about this, but they seemed largely unaware of any details concerning Hellyer’s comments.

The National Post published a column by regular political columnist Andrew Coyne. In his piece, "Holding Editors to Account", Coyne seems amazed by Hellyer’s belief in a decades long government conspiracy to withhold secrets about UFOs from the public, and thinks this might mean that Hellyer has lost his marbles. He links Hellyer’s "conspiracy views" with those of someone who believes the US government created the Islamist terrorist network that they are now fighting.

 

Coyne proclaims his belief in factual reporting but calls on newspaper editors to be more selective and "exclude the obviously marginal".

"There is a time and a place to debate whether the earth goes around the sun or the contrary, but we should have little time to address other matters if we were perpetually revisiting old controversies, or disproving every fantasy."

I guess this explains why large media outlets almost never report any UFO unless it can be easily explained as a meteor.

It is a very rare event for any large media outlet to present any news relating to UFOs and alien visitation with a straight face. Discovery Channel did recently produce a satisfactory summary of the Exopolitics conference in Toronto but they prefaced it with a goofy cartoon UFO landing. Perhaps this was done to assure the audience that they were not intending anyone to take this in any way seriously.

The same thing happens on CBC Radio anytime they have Chris Rutkowski providing reports from his annual survey of Canadian UFO events. It is always prefaced with yuk- yuk UFO alien jokes. I once heard an interview on "As it Happens" with an Indiana police officer who was witness to a huge triangular UFO that was seen by several officers in adjacent counties. The interviewer could hardly contain her smirking attitude while the officer tried his best to provide cool responses to her demeaning line of questioning. After the interview was concluded she was almost rolling on the floor in giggles as she said,

"Pardon me, but I really have to wonder what it is that they put in the water down there!"

It is hard to believe that such consistent disrespect can be dished out so casually by mass media outlets when it so clearly shows contempt for the views and beliefs of large parts of their reading, listening and viewing audience. The best that audience members can do when this bias and derogatory demeanour is displayed in the media is to complain to these media outlets.

As long as the present climate of ridicule persists in the large media organizations, this climate will discourage any serious researcher from publishing material on UFOs and will discourage agencies from funding this research.
 


Hellyer Believes in Public Role in Government Response to Alien Contact
Hellyer has stated his belief that elected governments have been largely excluded from information which is held within the bureaucracy about UFOs. He has in fact used his own experience to buttress this argument.

UFOlogy has not made great strides in finding conclusive, unambiguous evidence for the ETH (Extra-terrestrial hypothesis) or any other theory on the origin for unexplained UFOs. Despite this failure, many UFOlogists have evaluated the evidence and concluded for themselves that the ETH is the most likely explanation for the phenomena.

 

Given the potentially serious implications of this hypothesis, it makes sense to seriously investigate the potential implications of this hypothesis and to seek answers to the following questions:

  • Who are the visitors?

  • What do they want from us?

  • How are our governments reacting to this presence?

  • Are government agencies hiding information about UFOs from the public?

Paul Hellyer is the perhaps the first former senior Canadian government minister to suggest that these questions are important policy questions and that the public has a right to be involved in the development of policy regarding the response of government to possible extra-terrestrial contact events.

It is the duty of UFOlogists to seek truth and clarity in the reporting of UFO incidents. It is also our duty as citizens to seek the answers to the key questions posed in Exopolitics forums if we are at all open to the possibility that some UFOs may indeed be advanced vehicles fabricated and possibly piloted by beings from extraterrestrial civilizations.

And while many of the stories circulating in the UFO field are arguably in the category "too good to be true" you never know, you really, really never know…

 


 

From: Dr Michael Salla
Date: 12/03/05 00:23:09
To: exopolitics@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [exopolitics] Fox News Interview with Paul Hellyer

Paul Hellyer continues to amaze with his courageous efforts to speak the truth about the UFO phenomenon. Here’s a transcript of his recent interview on the Fox News Network. He certainly is getting the attention of many people.

In peace,

Michael E. Salla, PhD
www.exopolitics.org

 

Interview With Paul Hellyer
by Greg Jarrett

November 26, 2005

from LexisNexisNews Website

JARRETT: It is one of the most important problems facing our planet today. It’s an inter-galactic war with aliens. That’s what Paul Hellyer, a former Canadian Minister of Defense and Deputy Prime Minister said in a recent September speech and interview. Now he is asking the Canadian Parliament to hold hearings on relations with alien civilizations.

Joining me now to explain is Paul Hellyer himself. Thank you very much for being with us, Minister.

PAUL HELLYER, FORMER CANADIAN DEFENSE MINISTER: It’s a pleasure.

JARRETT: Here’s what you said: UFO’s are as real as the airplanes that fly over your head. Wow, how do you know that?

HELLYER: Well, because they are. And they do fly over your head all the time.

JARRETT: Well, aren’t those airplanes?

HELLYER: No, the airplanes fly over your head, but so do vehicles from some other galaxy.

JARRETT: How can you tell they’re not just airplanes?

HELLYER: Well, because a lot of people have seen them, the United States government has one or two, at least, in their possession. And a lot of people have seen some of the wreckage from the crash at Roswell and have worked to re-engineer, back-engineer some of the materials that were found there, for the benefit of the United States industry.

JARRETT: Are you telling me you think that American scientists have re-engineered the alien wreckage from that supposed, and I emphasize that world, UFO crash at Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947, to do what? Produce some sort of modern technological marvel?

HELLYER: Yes, absolutely, from microchips to particle guns, lasers, all sorts of things that seem like modern marvels and many of them were speeded up immeasurably thanks to the wreckage from the Roswell crash.

JARRETT: Have you seen any of that wreckage yourself?

HELLYER: No, I haven’t, but I’m familiar with people who claim to have seen it, including some in the basement of the White House.

JARRETT: Really? Now, have you seen a UFO yourself?

HELLYER: No, I haven’t.

JARRETT: Oh, you haven’t?

HELLYER: No.

JARRETT: Well, wouldn’t you want to see one before you came out publicly with your incredible resume and say, "look, we’ve got to hold hearings, the aliens are coming."

HELLYER: No, because I have read books written by reputable people, including Lieutenant Colonel Corso, who actually saw one of the bodies from the crash at Roswell, and who later, 10 years later, when he was working for the United States Army, was personally responsible for seeking some of the crash material into various industries there, for the benefit of those industries and for the...

JARRETT: Let me quote you further, because we’re a little short on time. I want to quote you further: The U.S. military -- you can put this up on the screen -- are preparing weapons, which could be used against the aliens, and they could get us into an intergalactic war. The Bush administration has finally agreed to let the military build a forward base on the moon, which will put them in a better position to keep track of the goings and comings of visitors from space, and to shoot at them.

HELLYER: Yes, I think it’s in the plans. It’s been really in the plans for, probably 40 or 50 years, originating with General Trudeau.

JARRETT: Mr. Hellyer, I’m out of time here, but there might be a lot of people, or some people, or maybe just one person watching that thinks you’re a lunatic. What would you say?

HELLYER: I would say they are totally out of the loop, that they haven’t taken any trouble to research this subject. And if they had taken the least bit of trouble, that their skepticism would be eliminated and they would be just as certain of their conclusions as I am.

JARRETT: All right, Paul Hellyer, former minister of defense, deputy prime minister in Canada. Thanks so much.

HELLYER: Do a little research on your own.

JARRETT: Oh, I will.