Project Moon Dust

File: UFO227

CUFON Computer UFO Network Seattle, Washington

JUST CAUSE

( CAUS ) Stands For Citizens Against UFO Secrecy

Publisher:

Lawrence Fawcett

Editor:

Barry Greenwood

NUMBER 8 JUNE 1986

PROJECT MOON DUST

(In our last issue, we alluded to one of those many project code names which turn up from time to time in released government documents. Few of these are ever identified in more than brief detail. However, Project Moon Dust, as named in recently-released DIA files is an exception. We have several documents which do seem to link UFOs with this colorfully named project. Our thanks to Robert Todd for providing us with the background information on his several-years-old research into Moon Dust.)

We have heard of stories, or more accurately -- rumors, of crashed UFOs and alien bodies recovered. Dozens of them are presently on file. Often in these accounts, military personnel respond quickly to a developing situation, enact a carefully-planned set of procedures (like photography, mapping, interviews, etc.); then, usually, the evidence is carted away to an unknown location for further study. That's what the rumors tell us.

You must have thought at times, while digesting these rumors, that such step-by-step action must have been scripted; that there must have been guide- lines to follow for everything to have been done so thoroughly and properly that not a stick of residue was left. You know how the military does everything by the book, as they tell us! If all this is so, then these procedures must be available for consultation when needed.

It's possible that we now have been pointed in the right direction to verify whether or not these procedures are on the record.

Salted through out some recent document releases, mainly from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and State Department, are references to "Project Moon Dust." The context of this codename to the rest of the published data was unclear, but the fact that it repeatedly turned up in documents dealing with UFOs told us that is was worth checking. A feeler was put into the March 1986 issue of Just Cause, requesting that anyone who had knowledge of Project Moon Dust to please contact us.

Not long afterwards, Robert Todd, a well-known CAUS researcher, informed us that he had researched Moon Dust in the late l970's. What he had found was quite revealing.

As a result of inquiries by Todd about Moon Dust, and other matters, the Air Force released a letter on August 20, 1979. It was identified as "AFCIN-1E- O", dated 3 November 1961. The letter was partly deleted, but enough was left to open the door on Moon Dust: (emphasis added where necessary--ed.)

Extract, page 1: "c. In addition to their staff duty assignments, intelligence team personnel have peacetime duty functions in support of such Air Force projects as Moondust, Bluefly, and UFO, and other AFCIN directed quick reaction projects which require intelligence team operational capabilities (see Definitions)."

Extract, page 2: "f. Blue Fly: Operation Blue Fly has been established to facilitate expeditious delivery to FTD of Moon Dust or other items of great technical intelligence interest. ACIN SOP for Blue Fly operations, February 1960 provides for 1127th participation."

"g. Moon Dust: As a specialized aspect of it's over-all material exploitation program, Headquarters USAF has established Project Moon Dust to locate, recover and deliver descended foreign space vehicles. ICGL #4, 25 April, l961, delineates collection responsibilities."

Extract, page 3: "c. Peacetime employment of AFCIN intelligence team capability is provided for in UFO investigation (AFR 200-2) and in support of Air Force Systems Command (AFCS) Foreign Technology Division (FTD) Projects Moon Dust and Blue Fly. These three peacetime projects all involve a potential for employment of qualified field intelligence personnel on a quick reaction basis to recover or perform field exploitation of unidentified flying objects, or known Soviet/Bloc aerospace vehicles, weapons systems, and/or residual components of such equipment. The intelligence team capability to gain rapid access, regardless of location, to recover or perform field exploitation, to communicate and provide intelligence reports is the only such collection capability available to AFCIN, and it is vitally necessary in view of current intelligence gaps concerning Soviet/Bloc technological capabilities."

Let's pause a moment to absorb this.

The letter immediately indicates that Moon Dust, "Blue Fly", and "UFO" are among A.F. Intelligence's quick reaction projects. It is probable here that "UFO" refers to Blue Book.

We have pointed out in CLEAR INTENT (pg. 9) that often the prefix word "Blue" has been used in connection with high-altitude vehicles, and it appears in several fact, and rumor, UFO projects. Here we see it again in "Blue Fly," which provided for transportation of Moon Dust material. And what did Moon Dust material include? Among other things, it included things acquired from the recovery and/or field exploitation of UFOs! Note how UFOs are set apart from Soviet/Bloc aerospace vehicles. Since the Soviets were the only other real space power in the world at the time, besides the U.S., what could have been meant by setting off UFOs as a separate subject of investigation? If they were British, or another nation's space vehicle, why not say this, as it was said for the Soviets?

Note that Moon Dust and "other items of great technical intelligence interest" were sent to the Foreign Technology Division at Wright-Patterson AFB in Ohio, under Project Blue Fly. FTD was the parent group for Project Blue Book. Coincidence?

Originally, Blue Book's investigative functions were partly aided by personnel of the 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron (AISS). Part of it's mission during WW2, and later in peacetime, was to "exploit downed people, paper and hardware" for intelligence information. The 4602nd's operations were transferred to AFCIN in July 1957, which then assigned the 1006th AISS most of the 4602nd's operations. The 1006th was re-designated the 1127th Field Activities Group in 1960. These units all performed UFO investigations for Blue Book, but were trained for and capable of additional activities in the event that one of these UFOs had crashed somewhere.

We discuss the operations of a possible "quick response unit" in CLEAR INTENT, pg 111. Our point in that discussion was that such a unit would come under the highest security classification. Any admission that a UFO phenomenon was real and unexplainable would not be in the government's best interest to state, considering the still-existent debunking policy. Certainly here we see UFO investigation linked to the highest levels of the U.S. Air Force.

When did Moon Dust begin? We aren't sure but it likely dates from the beginnings of Blue Book at least, i.e. the early 1950s. It's entirely possible that the 1952 crashed disc incident reported in letters by Rear Admiral Herbert Knowles (see Just Cause, March 1986) could have been investigated under Moon Dust, if it were called that then. It certainly fits the criteria for attention, as described in the Air Force's 1961 letter.

Compelling evidence for the Moon Dust/ crash retrieval link and its early origins appears in Donald Keyhoe's 1955 book, THE FLYING SAUCER CONSPIRACY. Note these extracts:

[Pages 214-15]

Two days after this Lou Corbin called me to report another development.

"Do you know anything about a `crashed-object' program?" he asked me.

"No. Whose project is it?"

"It's an Air Force deal, unless somebody's trying to trick me. You've heard of the 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron, of course?"

"Yes. It's a hush-hush unit. They have investigators in all Air Defense Squadrons."

"Well, I've been contacted by one of them. First I thought it might be some kind of hoax. But I've double-checked, He actually is with the 4602nd."

"Sounds queer, Lou. They're not supposed to talk to anyone outside of intelligence."

"I know. But he may be under special orders. Anyway, he's against the secrecy policy. He told me the 4602nd has a special program called the `investigation of unidentified crashed objects.'"

"If it's true, that IS big." I said. "It could mean they've actually got their hands on some flying saucers."

"He wouldn't admit that," said Corbin. "But I got the impression they'd recovered some kind of `objects'--probably something dropped from a saucer."

At 2:00 P.M. on November 30 [1954?] a mysterious bright flash in the sky was reported simultaneously in Atlanta, Newman, and Columbus, Georgia; in Sylacauga and Birmingham, Alabama; and as far away as Greenville, Mississippi. This brilliant light was immediately followed by a series of strange explosions, apparently centered high in the sky above Sylacauga.

Moments later a black object, six inches in diameter, crashed into the home of Mrs. Hewlett Hodges.

Smashing a three-foot-wide hole in the roof, the shining black object tore through the living-room ceiling. Striking the radio, it bounced off and gashed Mrs. Hodges' arm.

Meanwhile, the mysterious explosions had caused a hurried Air Defense alert. A three-state search for fallen objects was immediately begun by squadrons of Air Force planes.

When word of the "Sylacauga object" reached the Air Force, Intelligence officers flew to the scene from Maxwell Air Force Base at Montgomery. Explaining that "the Air Force is required to examine such strange objects," they whisked it away to Maxwell Field, from which it was flown immediately to ATIC.

An hour or two later the object was labeled a meteorite.

As soon as this appeared in the papers, I received a call from Lou Corbin. "It's plain that this is part of the Air Force `unidentified crashed-objects' investigation. They must believe the thing is linked with the saucers."

"It doesn't look like a coincidence," I said, "that this object fell just after those explosions. If it had been a meteor exploding, it wouldn't have made such a bright flash in the daytime."

"In the first news story," Corbin told me, "it was called an unidentified flying object. At least that's the way the Maxwell Field officers explained why they had started the search."

"This reminds me of that East New Haven signboard case," I commented. "On that occasion the object wasn't recovered. Judging from the size of the hole it made, however, it was probably about the same size."

Later FOIA requests have indicated that the DIA is currently the responsible agency for Moon Dust documentation. However, access is not being allowed because such access would reveal intelligence methods and are thus exempt from FOIA.

NASA has been involved as well, as this extract from a Jan. 13, 1969, memo indicates:

"The undersigned {Richard M. Schulherr} visited the Foreign Technology Division of the Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 9 Jan. 1969. The purpose of this trip was to identify specific items of space debris which had been forwarded to NASA and to re-establish personal liason with newly-assigned FTD Moondust personnel."

The Air Force's Moon Dust activity, as well as Blue Fly, is, in their words "no longer active." Perhaps the projects no longer go by these names but surely the procedures have not become obsolete. There is still a need to react to unknown vehicles landing on our soil. At the very least, national defense is served by such reaction.

One last thought. Could an MJ12-type committee have begun Moon Dust as a reaction to early UFO events like Roswell? It would be of interest to see exactly when Moon Dust began its operations.

The Editor

>>The following constitutes the entire text of the press release from CSICOP in Buffalo, concerning the recent "JALaska" UFO.

EXTRATERRESTRIAL OBJECT INVOLVED IN JAPAN AIR LINES PILOT'S UFO SIGHTING, ACCORDING TO UFO INVESTIGATOR

Buffalo, NY - An investigation of the incident in which an Unidentified Flying Object reportedly paced a Japan Air Lines 747 enroute to Anchorage, Alaska, for nearly 40 minutes on Nov. 18, 1986, reveals that at least one extraterrestrial object was involved -- the planet Jupiter, and possibly another -- Mars.

The investigation was conducted by Philip J. Klass, an internationally recognized UFOlogist and chairman of CSICOP's UFO Subcommittee. His investigations have yielded prosaic explanations for many famous UFO cases during the past 20 years.

At the time the UFO incident began near Ft. Yukon, the JAL airliner was flying south in twilight conditions so that an extremely bright Jupiter (-2.6 magnitude) would have been visible on the pilot's left-hand side, where he first reported seeing the UFO, according to Klass. Jupiter was only 10 degrees above the horizon, making it appear to the pilot to be at roughly his own 35,000 ft. altitude. Mars, slightly lower on the horizon, was about 20 degrees to the right of Jupiter but not as bright.

Although the very bright Jupiter, and less bright Mars, had to be visible to JAL Capt. Kenjyu Terauchi, the pilot never once reported seeing either -- only a UFO that he described as being a "white and yellow" light in his initial radio report to Federal Aviation Administration controllers at Anchorage.

Many of the colorful details of the incident carried by the news media, largely based on the six-week-old recollections of the pilot of JAL Flight 1628, are contradicted by a transcript of radio messages from the pilot to FAA controllers while the incident was in progress.

For example, news media accounts quoting the 747 pilot said that when he executed a 360 degree turn, the UFO had followed him around the turn. But this claim is contrary to what the pilot told FAA controllers at the time.

During the pilot's media interviews, he "remembered" some colorful details which did not really occur, judging from his earlier radio reports to the FAA, and Terauchi "forgot" several important events that would challenge his claim of being paced by an unknown craft.

For example, that another airliner, United Airlines Flight 69, heading north from Anchorage to Fairbanks, had agreed to deviate slightly from its course to allow FAA radar controllers to vector it to the vicinity of the JAL 747, while maintaining safe altitude and distance separation, to see if the United crew could spot the UFO.

At approximately 4:48 PM, as the United flight neared JAL, Terauchi reported that the UFO was to his far left and about 10 miles distant -- which was in the direction of Jupiter. At roughly 4:50 PM, the United pilot reported he now could see JAL but a short time later the United pilot said: "I don't see anybody around him."

Shortly afterwards, the JAL pilot reported that the UFO now was "just ahead of United" which is where Jupiter would appear to be from Terauchi's location. The United pilot would not notice Jupiter because it was to his right while his attention was focused on JAL which was to his far left.

Shortly afterward, the pilot of a USAF C-130 transport in the area volunteered to be vectored to the vicinity of the JAL airliner to see if he could spot any object near the airliner. The C-130 crew readily spotted the JAL 747, but they too could not see any object in its vicinity.

"This is not the first time that an experienced pilot has mistaken a bright celestial body for a UFO, nor will it be the last," Klass said. In one case, investigated by the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek in the early 1950's, a military pilot chased a "UFO" for more than 30 minutes, which turned out to be the bright star Capella. In this case, as with the recent Alaska incident, a radar operator reported briefly seeing an unknown blip on his radar scope.

During World War II, B-29 pilots flying at night from the Mariana Islands in the Pacific to bomb Japan reported being paced by a mysterious "ball-of-fire", which B-29 gunners tried, unsuccessfully, to shoot down. Some Army Air Corps intelligence officers suspected the object was a long- range Japanese aircraft equipped with a powerful searchlight, to illuminate the B-29s so they could be attacked by fighter aircraft, but such attacks never materialized. Finally the mysterious glowing object that seemed to pace the B-29s was identified. It was Venus, which was particularly bright at the time.

More than 25% of all UFOs reported during a 15-month period to the Center for UFO Studies (created in 1973 by Hynek) turned out upon investigation to be a bright planet or star. Some eyewitnesses reported that the celestial UFO "darted up and down", or "wiggled from side-to- side", and a variety of shapes were described.

In Capt. Terauchi's recollected account to the media six weeks after the incident, he described seeing two small UFOs in addition to a large one. But the transcript reveals that the pilot only briefly reported seeing TWO lights, NOT THREE, and thereafter he referred only to one in his radio communications with FAA controllers.

News media accounts of the UFO incident stressed that one unidentified object had been detected by a USAF radar in the vicinity of the 747's "blip", which seemed to confirm the pilot's visual sighting. However, radars operating in mountainous terrain such as that where the UFO incident occurred can receive spurious echoes when radar energy bouncing off an aircraft is reflected a second time from mountains and snow-covered terrain.

When the pilot first reported seeing the UFO, FAA traffic controllers -- ever concerned over the risk of a mid-air collision -- requested that radar controllers in an Air Force Regional Operations Command Center examine their displays to see if they could spot an unknown intruder. A radar operator there spotted something, but was unsure whether it might be a spurious echo. However, the echo appeared only briefly and was BEHIND the 747 whereas the pilot had reported that the UFO was in front or to the left of his aircraft.

Later, as the JAL 747 came within range of an FAA radar at the Fairbanks International Airport, a radar controller there was asked if he could spot another object in the vicinity of the airliner. Although the JAL pilot still was reporting a UFO, the controller replied that there were no unknown blips in the vicinity of JAL 1628.

On Jan. 11, Capt. Terauchi again reported seeing a UFO while flying in approximately the same part of Alaska. But after an FAA spokesman in Anchorage suggested that this UFO might only be lights from a distant village bouncing off clouds, the JAL pilot acknowledged that this could explain his second UFO sighting.

The transcript of radio communications during the Nov. 18 incident indicates that there were broken clouds at or below Flight 1628's altitude, which may help explain Capt. Terauchi's mistaking Jupiter for a UFO.

Even a scientifically trained former Navy officer, who would later become President, once mistook a bright planet for a UFO. The "victim" was Jimmy Carter and the incident occurred about 7:15 PM on Jan. 6, 1969, following his talk to the Lions Club of Leary, GA. As Carter later recalled the incident, he spotted the UFO in the west at an elevation he estimated to be about 30 deg. An investigation conducted by Robert Sheaffer, vice-chairman of CSICOP's UFO Subcommittee, was complicated by the fact that Carter had recalled an erroneous date for the incident. Once Sheaffer managed to determine the correct date, he found that a brilliant planet Venus was to the west and about 35 deg. above the horizon, where Carter reported seeing the UFO.

Klass credits astronomers Nick Sanduleak and C. B. Stephenson, of Case Western Reserve University, in Cleveland, for their valuable assistance in computing the positions and bearings of bright celestial bodies relative to the 747 airliner at the time of the incident.

"My suspicions that this UFO might be a bright celestial body were prompted by the fact that the pilot reported seeing the object for more than 30 minutes," Klass said. "Past experience has shown that when a UFO remains visible for many minutes, it almost always proves to be a celestial object." Another clue was the fact that when Flight 1628 descended 4,000 ft., the UFO still appeared to be at the airliner's altitude. At Jupiter's great distance, a change of 4,000 ft. in aircraft altitude would produce no noticeable change in the planet's apparent altitude.

Klass, who was a senior editor with Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine for nearly 35 years until his partial retirement this past June, has been investigating famous UFO cases as a a hobby for more than 20 years. His most recent book on the subject is "UFOs: The Public Deceived," published by Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY

CSICOP: Text of Klass report on JALaska

Msg: #5479 Sec: 1 - UFOlogy 30-APR-87 08:42 AM

Subj: Phil Klass (F)

From: Michael Norton

To: Sysop (X)

I got this number from Steve Gresser over on ZEPHYR. He said that I might want to call you about Phillip Klass. He was talking about how Mr. Klass had changed the qualifications for what could be considered a "genuine" UFO sighting, but I was unable to get any further details out of him. Could you elaborate? How has Mr. Klass "changed the rules?"

Thanks,

MBN

Msg: #5480 Sec: 1 - UFOlogy 30-APR-87 08:43 AM

Subj: Phil Klass (R) (F)

From: Sysop

To: Michael Norton (X)

Michael:

Thank you for calling, and welcome to ParaNet.

I think perhaps Steve misconstrued some of my statements. Having met Mr. Klass and had several long talks with him, I've concluded that he at least attempts to approach the subject with a modicum of intellectual integrity. I disagree with his conclusions and some of his explanations, but most of his methodology is beyond reproach. He has said from the outset that he wants someone to bring him a piece of a flying saucer (to which I recently replied, "Sure, Phil. I'll trade you for a piece of plasma.")

With many armchair skeptics, however, its a different story. First, they wanted a film. We got it -- the Mariana film. Then they said, well, how come astronomers don't see UFOs? Surprise, surprise. They do. Then they said, well, when the President of the United States sees a UFO, we'll believe it. Surprahz, Surprahz, along comes Jimmy Cahtuh. OK. How bout videotape? Got it -- Hudson Valley. Ask Al Hibbs of JPL if he thinks its a bunch of planes. Now the current criteria seems to be, "multiple independent photographs of the same anomalous object" (at least, according to Robert Scheaffer of Bay Area Skeptics). Well, we may have that as well -- I'm awaiting one photograph, gonna have it analyzed, and I'll get back to you. But how much you wanna bet, if it proves genuinely anomalous, that somebody somewhere will demand a live TV interview between Mike Wallace and an LGM?

As far as I'm concerned, we've proved that something of an anomalous nature is indeed happening. I don't care if its from outer space or not...we've met the challenge. The ball is now squarely in the skeptic's court.

Jim

PS: Do you mind if I forward our conversation into the public area? Since before your sun burned bright in your sky, I have awaited a decent conversation with a skeptic.

SOURCE : CUFON Computer UFO Network

SUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects

POSSIBLE FORGOTTEN OR UNKNOWN INFORMATION

1. I can assure you the flying saucers, given that they exist, are not constructed by any power on earth. President Harry S. Truman - Press conference, Washington DC, April 4, 1950.

2. Based upon unreliable and unscientific surmises as data, the Air Force develops elaborate statistical findings which seem impressive to the uninitiated public unschooled in the fallacies of the statistical method. One must conclude that the highly publicized Air Force pronouncements based upon unsound statistics serve merely to misrepresent the true character of the UFO phenomena. Yale Scientific Magazine (Yale University) Volume XXXVII, Number 7, April 1963

3. I feel that the Air Force has not been giving out all the available information on the Unidentified Flying Objects. You cannot disregard so many unimpeachable sources. John W. McCormack, Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States. January 1965

4. I have absolutely no idea where the UFO's come from or how they are operated, but after ten years of research, I know they are something from ourside our atmosphere. Dr. James E. McDonald, Professor of Atmospheric physics, University of Arizona. 1967.

5. I've been convinced for a long time that the flying saucers are real and interplanetary. In other words we are being watched by beings from outer space. Albert M. Chop, deputy public relations director, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and former United States Air Force spokesman for Project Blue Book.

6. The least improbable explanation is that these things UFO's are artificial and controlled. My opinion for some time has been that they have an extraterrestrial origin. Dr. Maurice Bilot, one of the world's leading aerodynamicists and mathematical physicists. Life, April 7, 1952

7. Of course the flying saucers are real and they are interplanetary. Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding, commanding officer of the Royal Air Force of Great Britain, August 1954

Comments: It would seem that many people thought there was something to all of this stuff called UFO's and if this is all true, could it be that all of us are being mislead. One thing is for sure the history of this subject matter is being forgotten and there is over ough the military won't comfirm or deny that. I can't say where it was based at or where it was going, say Air Force Lt. Col. Jerry Guess, who is stationed at Edwards and who is the only authorized dpokesman at the crash scene. So much secrecy is ironic in light of a pending congressional 40 years of it. It should be very clear to many people that this at least is true and if so then why? I must admit this does bother me to think that we think so little of ourselves not to care about whats real and whats not. The old story is why should anyone care unless there is some money to be made or does this really concern a layman who does not know anything anyway are so they say. but who are they? This is what we should start finding out and then maybe we will be a little closer to the problem. There has been to many good men who put themselves on the line for such a good cause, I believe we call this truth or have we forgotten this too.

Dale D. Goudie, Director Of CUFON.

-> LATE NEWS <-

JUNE 1, 1986

CUFON: Does not necessarily take or have any opinion as to the (AP) News Articles which are on this system.

Note: CUFON - Leaves this up to the reader or readers.

The Seattle Times

BY Elizabeth Puliiam

Times Staff Reporter

NASA should get out of the business of launching spacecraft and let private industry take over before astronomical costs cancel the space program forever, according to one member of a presidential commission on U.S. space strategy.

Unless we can radically lower the cost of reaching space, it's possible that this country may not go, said David Webb, a space development consultant and member of President Reagan's National Commission on Space, in an interview here yesterday.

Webb will address the Space Development Conference at 3:30 p.m. today in the Westin Hotel. The Commission delivered its recommendations to the president Friday, although parts of the controversial report had earlier been leaked to trade journals. The report describes layers of space stations between the earth, moon and mars to be built by 2017.

The cost of putting objects into space must be slashed to noe-tenth its present level, from $2,000 per pound, to $200 per pound, to make further space exploitation possible, Webb said. That means that the private sector should be more heavily involved in designing and operating space craft.

CUFON - Computer UFO Network

-> LATEST NEWS <-

July 17, 1986

The Seattle Times

Close-Up Mystery Air Force Crash

Hush Fuels Reports That Doomed Plane Was "Stealth"

Knlght-Ridder Newspapers and Reuters:

Bakersfield, Calif. - Out on Rancheria Road stands a roadblock manned by two soldiers wearing "sunglasses", green-and-brown camouflage outfits and black M-16 rifles slung over their backs.

Beyond that roadblock, out in the sun-bleached hills about 12 miles from Bakersfield, is a mystery.

Early last Friday, something fell out of the sky and into a canyon in the Sequoia National Forest, crashing on Kenneth and Agnes Mebane's ranch about 4 miles south of the roadblock. It is something the Air Force wishes no one else knew about. And they intend to do everything they can to keep others from finding out.

I haven't asked them anything, says 63-year-old Kenneth Mebane of the soldiers who moved onto his property without asking permission shortly after the 2 A.M. incident.

Then, echoing many who live nearby, Mebane adds, I think that's their business. Officially, the Air Force says only that one of its planes crashed and that its pilot, Maj. Ross Mulhare, was killed. Military analysts suspect the plane was one of a number of top-secret Stealth fighters designed to be virtually invisible to enemy radar. The Pentagon refuses to acknowledge that any such planes exist, although it is known the Air Force currently has three Stealth programs in operation.

The plane also is suspected to have come from nearby Edwards Air Force Base, alth investigation into reports that the Lockheed Corp., major contractor for the F-19 Stealth fighter, may have lost hundreds of documents involved with its Stealth research.

The plane was first sighted by a pilot in a small commercial airplane, who radioed the Federal Aviation Administration in Los Angeles. The FAA notified the Forest Service, which called in Kern County firefighters from Bakersfield to put out a 120 acre fire sparked by the crash. Fire Capt. Darrell Tiede and his crew from the Niles station house arrived before the military and saw the wreckage. But Tiede refuses to talk about it. A reporter for the Bakersfield Californian says one firefighter described the crash site as molten iron. But the reporter says the man's supervisor quickly told him not to say anymore.

Kern County Fire Capt. Bill Alexander says all the secrecy can cause problems. Air Force personnel shooed firefighters away from the area before they had completely mopped up the blaze, he says. A Kern County "coroner's investigator was dispatched to the ranch, but turned back to Bakersfield when military officials said they were taking care of the remains. The Air Force refuses to say where the pilot was taken."

While the cleanup continues, the Air Force has moved into an office at Meadows Field, Bakersfield's public airport. And it has been flying helicopters and twin-engine planes in and out of the field over the past six days. If the plane that crashed was a Stealth model, the Air Force has to be concerned that no debris is left in the area. Not only is the sleek, highly aerodynamic shape of a Stealth fighter believed important in eluding radar, but the materials used to build the plane must be of a special kind to absorb, rather than reflect, enemy radar. Thus the military would have to make sure that every chunk of the plane's body was removed.

CUFON - Computer UFO Network

- > LATE NEWS <-

DECEMBER 5, 1985

FALLSTON, MD. ( AP )

REAGAN TO GORBACHEV: "THREAT FROM ET'S WOULD UNITE EARTH"

President Reagan revealed wednesday that his discussions with soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, touched not only on "Star Wars," but the extraterrestrial.

In an address to students at Fallston High School here, reahan departed from his prepared remarks to say that in his private discussions with Gorbachev at last months Geneva summit, he noted that "we're all god's children."

"I couldn't help but say to him just think how easy his task and mine might be in these meetings that we held if suddenly if there was a threat to this world from some other species from another planet outside in the universe," Reagan said the president went on to say that such an event would force himself and Gorbachev to forget all the little local differences that we have between our countries and they would find out that we really are all human beings here on this earth together.

"Well, I don't suppose we can wait for some alien race to come down and threaten us," Reagan added. "But I think that between us we can bring about that realization."

The President then ended his remarks, without giving his young audience a clue as to how Gorbachev responded.

History of UFO's During World War II

During world war II the accumulation of sightings of mysterious celestial objects, finally started to worry the military authorities.

In both camps, high-ranking officials of the intelligence services started to study these strange objects and investigation committees composed of military and scientific personnel were set up in various countries. They had a double purpose: first of all to determine the nature of these flying objects and then to see if they constituted a threat to the security of the nation.

During world war II, the Allies, just like the Germans, noticed the presence of these enigmatic flying objects above their secret bases. The first reaction of each side was obviously to suspect espionage on the part of their enemy.

In 1943 the English were the first to set up a special group to enquire into the question of these objects. The British set up a small organization to collect evidence. It was headed by Lieutenant General Massey and was inspired by reports from a spy who, in fact was a double agent operating under the orders of the Mayor of Cologne. He had confirmed that the "Foo-fighters" were not German devices, but that the Germans thought that they were Allied weapons which, of course, the British knew was not so.

Later in 1966, was learned from the British Aviation Minister that project Massey had been officially classified in 1944. Perhaps it was pure coincidence, but the double agent was denounced and executed at the beginning of that year. For their part the Germans did not remain inactive. But in 1944, the Wehrmacht asked Oberkommando of the "Luftwaffe (aviation)" to set up a center to collect information on all the various sightings of these mysterious celestial objects.

This was known as Sonderburo No 13 which, until the time of the German defeat scrupulously applied itself to its job. The short time that this commission was in existence prevented it from coming to any definite conclusions, but it collected an impressive amount of information.

CUFON - UFO Information Service Seattle, Washington

History of UFO's During World War II

Part II

The first sighting, studied by the Sonderburo, went back two year and came from a Hauptmann Fischer, an engineer in civil life. On March 14, 1942, at 5:35 p.m., Fischer landed at the secret air base at Banak, in Norway.

At that instant the radar picked up a luminous object and Fischer was asked to go up and identify it. At about 10,000 feet the pilot caught sight of the object, and gave a description by radio to the base: an enormous streamlined craft about 300 feet long and about 50 feet in diameter. The aerial whale which was Fischer's title for it stayed horizontal for a long moment before rising vertically and disappearing at great speed.

It was not a machine constructed by the hand of man, Fischer stated in his report. On reading the report, Air Marshall Hermann Goering concluded that the solitude of the north does not seem to have done much for this pilot. The report of another interesting incident was carefully preserved in the archives of the German Investigation Committee: that of the launching of an experimental rocket on February 12, 1944, at the Kummersdorf test center.

On that day the Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, S.S. Reichsfuhrer Himmler and S.S. Gruppenfuhrer Heinz Kammler were present at the launching which was being filmed. Some days later the authorities at the base organized a showing of the film. The astonished spectators could see very clearly a spherical body which followed the rocket and circled around it.

The authorities immediately suspected Allied espionage. However, an agent informed Himmler that the English were themselves victims of the same sort of phenomenon and thought that it was a new type of German prototype craft. However, the most convincing evidence filed away by the Sonderburo came from a military flying ace.

On September 29, 1944, at 10:45 a.m., a test pilot was trying out a new Messerschmitt jet, ME 262 Schwalbe, when his attention was suddenly caught by two luminous points situated on his right. He shot at full speed in that direction and found himself face to face with a cylindrical object, more than three hundred feet long with some openings along its side, and fitted with long antennae placed in front up to about halfway along its length. Having approached within about 1,500 feet of the craft the pilot was amazed to see that it was moving at a speed of more than 1,200 m.p.h.

Information On - Close Encounters / Explanation Of Classifications

LRS - Cases that are classified as LRS are usually cases in which the witness or witnesses have observed an object or light at a long distance, usually over 500 feet away, and up to several miles. Distance light in the night sky, such as those which maybe at the same altitude as satellites, are classified as a LRS case. There's no interaction or effect on those making the observation.

CE I - Cases that are classified as CE I are usually cases in which the witness or witnesses have observed an object or light at a short distance, usually within 500 feet away, from the witness or witnesses. There's no interaction or effect on those making the observation.

CE II - Cases classified as CE II are quite similar to CE I cases. The difference in these 2 classifications are, CE II reports usually involve a type of interaction, such as electromagnetic effects, strange effects on animals, or perhaps on the witness themselves. Cases that are reported to the CUFON that occurred within 500 500 feet of the witness or witnesses are usually also classified as a CE II.

CE III - In cases with this classification, occupants in, on, or about a unidentified flying object are reported. It should be noted that this CE III classification does "Not" pertain to contact cases. There are no contacts or communications carried on in this classification of sighting.

CE IV - This type of sighting or report involves some type of contact or exchange of said mental or verbal communications between the witness or witnesses and the occupants.

CE V - Cases classified as CE V are known as abductions cases or missing time cases i.e. said people have consciously remembered seeing a UFO but do not remember being taken aboard and examined.

UAO - Cases classified as UAO`s are known as Unauthorized Aerial Objects. We only use this term after all analysis and investigation has been done to verify a case as an unknown which means that the object or objects are real but Unauthorized. The Air Force uses the term Unknowns, of course this means that they are not prepared to take the responsibility to say that the object or objects are real after the analyzing has been done to verify the reality of the phenomena.

CUFON - Please remember that CUFON is the only organization using UAO, CE IV, CE V also LRS codes. LRS stands for "long range sighting" anything over 500 feet. We use this type of coding for computer calculations and for high numbers of cases. We also use these codes for sequential sightings which are very important when studying UFO movement i.e. the same reported UFO or UFO's moving from one state to another or a number of states and etc.

CUFON Computer UFO Network

File #: 1

From: UFO INFO SERVICE

Date Sent: 06-18-1986

Subject: 1954 JANAP 146(C)

SOURCE: SELF EXPLAINED

DATE: 10 MARCH 1954

JANAP 146(C)

THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF JOINT COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS COMMITTEE WASHINGTON, D. C. 10 MARCH 1954

LETTER OF PROMULGATION

1. JANAP 146(C) COMMUNICATION INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING VITAL INTELLIGENCE SIGHTINGS FROM AIRBORNE AND WATERBORNE SOURCES, is an unclassified publication.

2. JANAP 146(C) COMMUNICATION INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING VITAL INTELLIGENCE SIGHTINGS FROM AIRBORNE AND WATERBORNE SOURCES, is effective upon receipt and supersedes JANAP 146 (B), COMMUNICATION INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING VITAL INTELLIGENCE SIGHTINGS FROM AIRCRAFT (CIRVIS) and all other conflicting instructions. JANAP 146(B) shall be destroyed by burning. No report of destruction is required.

CHAPTER II

CIRVIS REPORTS

SECTION I - GENERAL

201. INFORMATION TO BE REPORTED AND WHEN TO REPORT

a. Sightings within the scope of this chapter, as outlined in Article 102b(l), (2), and (3), are to be reported as follows:

(l) While airborne (except over foreign territory - See Article 212).

(a) Single aircraft or formations of aircraft which appear to be directed against the United States, its territories or possessions.

(b) Missiles.

(d) Submarines.

(e) A group or groups of military surface vessels.

(2) Upon Landing.

(a) Individual surface vessels, submarines, or aircraft of unconventional design, or engaged in suspicious activity or observed in an unusual location or following an unusual course.

(b) Confirmation reports.

202. SIGHTINGS NOT TO BE REPORTED

Reports are not desired concerning surface craft or aircraft in normal passage, or known U.S. military or government vessels and aircraft.

JANAP 146(C)

CHAPTER III

MERINT REPORTS

SECTION I - GENERAL

301. INFORMATION TO BE REPORTED AND WHEN TO REPORT

a. Sightings within the scope of this chapter (as outlined in Article 102b., (4), (5), (6), (7) are to be reported as follows:

(l) Immediately (except when within territorial waters of other nations as prescribed by international law)

a) Guided Missiles

b) Unidentified flying objects

c) Submarines

d) Group or groups of military vessels

e) Formation of aircraft (which appear to be directed against the United States, its territories or possessions).

f) Individual surface vessels, submarines, or aircraft of unconventional design, or engaged in suspicious activity or observed in an unusual location or following an unusual course.

(2) When situation changes sufficiently to warrant an amplifying report (see Art. 409).

SECTION III - SECURITY

308. MILITARY AND CIVILIAN

a. All persons aware of the contents or existence of a MERINT report are governed by the Communications Act of 1934 and amendments thereto, and Espionage Laws. MERINT reports contain information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, 18 U.S. Code, 793 and 794. The unauthorized transmission or revelation of the contents of MERINT reports in any manner is prohibited.

b. Military commands and activities in making local distribution of MERINT reports and in subsequent communications regarding the contents of any MERINT report shall handle such communications in accordance with current security regulations.

402. EXAMPLES BY TYPE

The following are examples of the types of "MERINT" reports. Specific application of Military or commercial procedure has been avoided since the means of transmission would determine the procedure to be used. Of primary importance is the expeditious handling and accuracy of the reports.

a. "MERINT" REPORT

(1) A radiotelegraph transmission:

RAPID US GOVT

COMEASTSEAFRON 90 CHURCH ST. NEW YORK

MERINT 5126 N 14230W 3 UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS HEADED NW AT 17000 FEET CIGAR SHAPE 50 FEET TO SW AT 2 MILES VERIFIED BY NAVIGATOR VISIBILITY UNLIMITED 211513Z JONES NKLN

CUFON Computer UFO Network

File #: 3

From: UFO INFO SERVICE

Date Sent: 06-18-1986

Subject: 1966 JANAP 146(E)

SOURCE: SELF EXPLAINED

DATE: 31 MARCH 1966

JANAP 146(E)

31 MARCH 1966

THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF Washington, D.C. 20301

UNITED SATES NATIONAL LETTER OF PROMULGATION FOR JANAP 146(E).

1. JANAP 146(E), CANADIAN - UNITED STATES COMMUNICATIONS INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING VITAL INTELLIGENCE SIGHTINGS, is an unclassified non-registered publication prepared under the direction of the Canadian Defense Staff and the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff for Canadian and United States Joint use.

102. Scope. -

a. This publication is limited to the reporting of information of vital importance to the security of the United States of America and Canada and their forces, which in the opinion of the observer, requires very urgent defensive and/or investigative action by the US and/or Canadian Armed Forces.

b. The procedures contained in this publication are provided for:

(1) US and Canadian civil and commercial aircraft.

(2) US and Canadian government and military aircraft other than those operating under separate reporting directives.

(3) US and Canadian merchant vessels operating under US and Canadian registry.

(4) US and Canadian government and military vessels other than those operating under separate reporting directives.

(5) Certain other US and Canadian vessels including fishing vessels.

(6) Military installations receiving reports from civilian or military land based or waterborne observers unless operating under separate reporting directives.

(7) Government and civilian agencies which may initiate reports on receipt of information from land-based, airborne or waterborne observers.

1-1

JANAP 146(E)

CHAPTER II

CIRVIS REPORTS

SECTION I - GENERAL

201. Information to be Reported and When to Report.

a. Sightings within the scope of this chapter, as outlined in paragraphs 102b(1), (2), (6) and (7), are to be reported as follows:

(1) While airborne and from land based observers.

(a) Hostile or unidentified single aircraft or formations of aircraft which appear to be directed against the United States or Canada or their forces.

(b) Missiles.

(d) Hostile or unidentified submarines.

(e) Hostile or unidentified group or groups of military surface vessels.

(f) Individual surface vessels, submarines, or aircraft of unconventional design, or engaged in suspicious activity or observed in a location or on a course which may be interpreted as constituting a threat to the United States, Canada or their forces.

(g) Any unexplained or unusual activity which may indicate a possible attach against or through Canada or the United States, including the presence of any unidentified or other suspicious ground parties in the Polar Region or other remote or sparsely populated areas.

(2) Upon landing.

(a) Reports which for any reason could not be transmitted while airborne.

(b) Unlisted airfields or facilities, weather stations, or air navigation aids.

204. Contents of CIRVIS Reports.

2-1 ORIGINAL

c. When reporting unidentifiable objects:

(1) CIRVIS Report.

(2) Identification of reporting aircraft or observer as appropriate

(3) Object sighted. Give brief description of the object which should contain the following items:

(a) Shape.

(b) Size compared to a known object (use one of the following terms: Head of a pin, pea, dime, nickel, quarter, half dollar, silver dollar, baseball, grapefruit, or basketball) held in the hand at about arm's length.

(d) Number.

(e) Formation, if more than one.

(f) Any discernible features or details.

(g) Tail, trail, or exhaust, including size of same compared to size of object.

(h) Sound. If heard, describe sound.

(i) Other pertinent or unusual features.

(4) Description of Course of Object:

(a) What first called the attention of observer(s) to the object?

(b) Angle or elevation and azimuth of object when first observed.

(d) Description of flight path and maneuvers of object.

(e) How did the object disappear? (Instantaneously to the North, etc.)

(f) How long was the object visible? (Be specific, 5 minutes, 1 hour, etc.)

(5) Manner of Observation:

(a) Use one or any combination of the following items: Ground-visual, ground-electronic, air electronic. (If electronic, specify type of radar.)

(b) Statement as to optical aids (telescopes, binoculars, etc.) used and description thereof.

(c) If the sighting is made while airborne, give type of aircraft, identification number, altitude, heading, speed, and home station.

(6) Time and Date of Sighting:

(a) Zulu time-date group of sighting.

(b) Light conditions. (Use one of the following terms: Night, day, dawn, dusk.)

(7) Location of Observer(s). Exact latitude and longitude of each observer, and/or geographical position. A position with reference to a known landmark also should be given in electrical reports, such as "2mi N of Deeville;" "3mi SW of Blue Lake." Typographical errors or "garbling" often result in electrically transmitted messages, making location plots difficult or impossible.

(8) Weather and Winds - Aloft Conditions at Time and Place of Sightings:

(a) Observer(s) account of weather conditions.

(b) Report from nearest AWS or U.S. Weather Bureau Office of wind direction and velocity in degrees and knots at surface, 6,000', 10,000', 16,000', 20,000', 30,000', 50,000', and 80,000' if available.

(d) Visibility.

(e) Amount of cloud cover.

(f) Thunderstorms in area and quadrant in which located.

(g) Temperature gradient.

(9) Any other unusual activity or condition, meteorological, astronomical, or otherwise, which might account for the sighting.

(10) Interception or identification action taken (such action may be taken whenever feasible, complying with existing air defense directives).

(11) Location, approximate altitude, and general direction of flight of any air traffic or balloon releases in the area which could possibly account for the sighting.

2-5 ORIGINAL

(12) Position title and comments of the preparing officer, including his preliminary analysis of the possible cause of the sighting(s).

(13) Existence of physical evidence, such as materials and photographs.

2-6 ORIGINAL

File #: 8

From: UFO INFO SERVICE

Date Sent: 06-18-1986

Subject: 1954 AFR 200-2

SOURCE: SELF EXPLAINED

DATE: 12 AUGUST 1954

AIR FORCE REGULATION) *AFR 200-2 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

NO. 200-2 ) 1-5 WASHINGTON, 12 AUGUST 1954

INTELLIGENCE

Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting (Short Title:UFOB) �

Paragraph

Purpose and Scope_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1

Definitions_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _2

Objectives_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3

Responsibility_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4

Guidance_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5

ZI Collection _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6

Reporting _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7

Evidence _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _8

Release of Facts _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _9

1. Purpose and Scope. This Regulation establishes procedures for reporting information and evidence pertaining to unidentified flying objects and sets forth the responsibility of Air Force activities in this regard. It applies to all Air Force activities.

2. Definitions:

a. Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB) -- Relates to any airborne object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features does not conform to any presently known aircraft or missile type, or which cannot be positively identified as a familiar object.

b. Familiar Objects -- Include balloons, astronomical bodies, birds, and so forth.

3. Objectives. Air Force interest in unidentified flying objects is twofold: First as a possible threat to the security of the United States and its forces, and secondly, to determine technical aspects�involved.

a. Air Defense. To date, the flying objects reported have imposed no threat to the security of the United States and its Possessions. However, the possibility that new air vehicles, hostile aircraft or missiles may first be regarded as flying objects by the initial observer is real. This requires that sightings be reported rapidly and as completely as information permits.

b. Technical. Analysis thus far has failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for a number of sightings reported. The Air Force will continue to collect and analyze reports until all sightings can be satisfactorily explained, bearing in mind that:

(1) To measure scientific advances, the Air Force must be informed on experimentation and development of new air vehicles.

(2) The possibility exists that an air vehicle of revolutionary configuration may be developed.

(3) The reporting of all pertinent factors will have a direct bearing on the success of the technical analysis.

(4) Responsibility:

a. Reporting. Commanders of Air Force activities will report all information and evidence that may come to their attention, including that received from adjacent commands of the other services and from civilians.

b. Investigation. Air Defense Command will conduct all field investigations within the ZI, to determine the identity of any UFOB.

c. Analysis. The Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC), Wright- Patterson Air Corce Base,Ohio, will analyze and evaluate: All information and evidence reported within the ZI after the Air Defense Command has exhausted all efforts to identify the UFOB; and all information and evidence collected in overseas areas.

d. Cooperation. All activities will cooperate with Air Defense Command representatives to insure the economical and prompt success of an investigation, including the furnishing of air and ground transportation, when feasible.

5. Guidance. The thoroughness and quality of a report or investigation into incidents of unidentified flying objects are limited only by the resourcefulness and imagination of the person responsible for preparing the report. Guidance set forth below is based on experience and has been found helpful in evaluating incidents:

a. Theodolite measurements of changes of azimuth and elevation and angular size.

b. Interception, identification, or air search action. These actions may be taken if appropriate and within the scope of existing air defense regulations.

c. Contact with local aircraft control and warning (AC&W) units, ground observation corps (GOC) posts and filter centers, pilots and crews of aircraft aloft at the time and place of sighting whenever feasible, and any other persons or organizations which may have factual data bearing on the UFOB or may be able to offer corroborating evidence, electronic or otherwise.

d. Consultation with military or civilian weather forecasters to obtain data on: Tracks of weather balloons released in the area, since these often are responsible for sightings; and any unusual meteorological activity which may have a bearing on the UFOB.

e. Consultation with astronomers in the area to determine whether any astronomical body or phenomenon would account for or have a bearing on the observation.

f. Contact with military and civilian tower operators, air operations offices, and so forth, to determine whether the sighting could be the result of misidentification of known aircraft.

g. Contact with persons who might have knowledge of experimental aircraft of unusual configuration, rocket and guided missile firings, and so forth, in the area.

6. ZI Collection. The Air Defense Command has a direct interest in the facts pertaining to UFOB's reported within the ZI and has, in the 4602d Air Intelligence Service Squadron (AISS), the capabil8ity to investigate these reports. The 4602d AISS is composed of specialists trained for field collection and investigation of matters of air intelligence interest which occur within the ZI. This squadron is highly mobile and deployed throughout the ZI as follows: Flights are attached to air defense divisions, detachments are attached to each of the defense forces, and the squadron headquarters is located at Peterson Field, Colorado, adjacent to Headquarters, Air Defense Command. Air Force activities, therefore, should establish and maintain liaison with the nearestelement of this squadron. This can be accomplished by contacting the appropriate echelon of the Air Defense Command as outlined above.

a. All Air Force activities are authorized to conduct such preliminary investigation as may be required for reporting purposes; however, investigations should not be carried beyond this point, unless such action is requested by the 4602d AISS.

b. On occasions-after initial reports are submitted-additional data is required which can be developed more economically by the nearest Air Force activity, such as: narrative statements, sketches, marked maps, charts,and so forth.Under such circumstances,appropriate commanders will be contacted by the 4602d AISS.

7.Reporting.All information reporting to UFOB's will be reported promptly The method (electrical or written) and priority of dispatch will be selected in accordance with the apparent intelligence value of the information. In most instances, reports will be made by electrical means: Information over 24 hours ald will be given a "deferred" precedence. Reports over 3 days old will be made by written report prepared on AF Form 112, Air Intelligence Information report, and AF Form 112a, Supplement to AF Form 112.

a. Addderssess:

(1) Electrical Reports. All electrical reports will be multiple addressed to: (a) COMMANDER, Air Defense Command, Ent Air Force Base, Col- orado Springs, Colorado.

(b) Nearest Air Division (Defense). (For ZI only. )

(d) Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF, Wasgington 25, D.C.

(2) Written Reports:

(a) Within the ZI, reports will be submitted direct to the Air Defensc Command. Air Defensc Command will reproduce the report and distribute it to interested ZI intellige- nce agencies. The original report together with notation of the distribution effected then will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF, Washington 25, D.C.

(b) Outside the ZI, reports will be submitted direct to Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF,Washington 25, D.C. as prescribed in (Intelligence Collection Instructions" (ICI), June 1954.

b. Short Title. "UFOB" will appear at the beginning of the text of electrical messages and in the subject of written reports.

c. Negative Data. The word "negative"

Index for Associated Press (AP) Articles

Art # Date From Bulletin # Subject

1 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 28 1978 AP PILOT DISAPPEARS

2 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 28 1985 MISSING PHANTOM JET

3 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 28 1978 NEW ZEALAND ALERT

4 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 29 1979 CIA UFO SURVEILLANCE

5 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 30 1966 DR. J.E. McDONALD

6 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 30 1968 SCIENT.RECOMM.STUDY

7 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 30 1966 UFOS CALLED GAS

8 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 31 1966 FORD TO ASK INQUIRY

9 06-17-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 31 1966 CONGRESS REASSURED

10 09-23-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 31 1968 CO U ENDS STUDY

11 09-23-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 31 1966 SATEL.TERMED UNKNOWN

12 09-23-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 32 1969 NO VISITS FROM AFAR

13 07-11-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 32 1947 CRASHED DISK ROSWELL

14 07-12-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 32 1966 SIGHTINGS PEAK 1,060

15 07-19-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 33 1973 P.CARTER REPORTS UFO

16 07-19-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 33 1977 CARTER,ASKED NASA

17 07-19-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 33 1977 NASA REFUSES CARTER

18 07-19-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 33 1977 UN TO SET UP AGENCY

19 07-19-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 33 1978 UN HEARS CASE - UFO

20 07-20-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 34 1969 BLUE BOOK CLOSES

21 07-26-1986 UFO INFO SERVICE 34 1944 NEW GERMAN WEAPONS

22 01-11-1987 UFO INFO SERVICE 34 1986 ALASKA 747 SIGHTING

23 01-11-1987 UFO INFO SERVICE 35 1986 ALASKA 747 SIGHTING

- End of Index -

**** THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ ****