Nexus Magazine, vol 13:2 (Feb-March 2006): 55-60
In a May 2001 speech, President Bush argued that the 30 year old ABM Treaty was outdated and that the U.S. must formally move beyond its constraints to deal with new security threats:
The Bush administration gave its formal notice to withdraw on December 13, 2001, and promptly withdrew six months later.
The Bush administration thus formally embarked on realizing some of the goals of the Strategic Defense Initiative that had first been promoted by the Reagan administration in March 1983. Reagan had envisaged the development of space based intercept systems that could be used to destroy large scale ballistic missile attacks on the United States.
Reagan’s SDI floundered as the Cold War wound down and the Democrat controlled U.S. Congress aimed to use the anticipated ‘peace dividend’ to improve social programs. Furthermore, many prominent scientists argued against the cost of developing SDI’s futuristic weapons systems.
In July 1999, the Clinton Administration passed the National Missile Defense Act calling for a more limited anti-ballistic missile system:
The Bush administration quickly moved to
formally deploying an antiballistic missile system as part of the
National Missile Defense Program.
These developments towards deploying weapons in space received a surprising objection when a former Canadian Defense Minister addressed a UFO Conference in Toronto.
linked the deployment of space weapons not to possible ballistic
missile attacks by rogue nations or terrorist groups, but as a means
of targeting UFOs that were piloted by extraterrestrial visitors.
While Defense Minister in the Lester Pearson administration from 1963-67, Hellyer had officially rebuffed initiatives from the Johnson administration to approve an anti-ballistic missile defense system.
In a 2003 article he wrote:
During his 2005 speech, Hellyer also addressed the UFO phenomenon and described his time as Minister for Defense where the occasional UFO sighting report crossed his desk.
He claims to never have had time for what he considered to be a
“flight of fancy”, but nevertheless retained an interest in the UFO
phenomenon. While Minister for Defense, he was guest of honor at the
opening of the world’s first UFO landing pad at Alberta, Canada in
1967. He thought it an innovative idea from a progressive Canadian
community willing to pay for his helicopter ride, but did not give
much thought to UFOs as having serious policy implications.
Philip Corso’s, The Day After Roswell, sparked intense interest for Hellyer in terms of its policy implications, and Corso distinguished service in the U.S. Army and the Eisenhower administration.
Corso who reached the rank of Lt Colonel, named real people, institutions and events in his book that could be checked. Intrigued by the policy implications, Hellyer decided to confirm whether Corso’s book was real or a “work of fiction”. He contacted a retired United States Air Force General and spoke to him directly to verify Corso’s claims. The unnamed General simply said: “every word is true and more”. 5
Hellyer then proceeded to discuss the
“and more …” with the general and claimed he was told remarkable
things concerning UFOs and the extraterrestrial hypothesis that
interplanetary visitors have been here since at least 1947. Hellyer
then privately asked a number of ‘officials’, some occupying senior
positions, about Corso, and again received confirmation that
claims were accurate.6
Finally convinced that the UFO phenomenon was real Hellyer decided
to come forward and publicly speak about some of the “most
profoundly important policy questions that must be addressed.”
Significantly, Hellyer’s stated position
on deploying weapons in Space and opposition to the possible
military targeting of extraterrestrials is in stark contrast to the
man who initially convinced him of the reality of extraterrestrial
visitors: Lt. Col. Philip Corso.
Corso viewed the extraterrestrials as a direct threat to U.S national security and declared:
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 President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
Corso believed that SDI was the appropriate response to extraterrestrial intrusions, and that the US and USSR both knew what SDI’s true purpose was:
A number of UFO researchers have claimed that these bellicose statements towards extraterrestrial visitors were introduced by Corso’s co-author William Birnes, and that Corso was not as anti-extraterrestrial as The Day After Roswell suggests.
That is not accurate as a reading of Col Corso’s original notes make clear. His original notes were published in Italy and contain many similar statements revealing the depth of Corso’s animosity towards visiting extraterrestrials.9
For example, in terms of violating U.S. air space, Corso wrote:
Corso went on to fully describe the nature of the interaction between extraterrestrial visitors and the general population:
Corso here reveals the depth of his animosity towards extraterrestrials and the information he had received on their intrusive activities. His statements reveal that he had a skeptical view of the ‘benevolence’ of visiting extraterrestrials.
Corso endorsed comments such as General Douglas Macarthur’s claim in 1955 that the,
In terms of cooperation between the US and Russia (former USSR) to deal with the extraterrestrials, Corso wrote:
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 that 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.
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.
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 the highly decorated 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 have been many rumors that the U.S. has entered into agreements with extraterrestrial races. For example, there is considerable circumstantial and testimonial evidence pointing to President Eisenhower being actively involved in meeting with and reaching agreements with extraterrestrial races.13
Col Corso, who served in the Eisenhower administration, alludes to such agreements in various passages in the Day After Roswell.
There have been an ever growing number of alleged whistleblowers describing 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.
These agreements allegedly involved the exchange of technology or information by extraterrestrials in exchange for the right to establish bases on U.S. territory. The existence of such bases is explicitly revealed by Corso in his private notes.
After describing the various intrusive activities performed by the extraterrestrials, Corso went on to make the following startling claim:
The implication here is that the
extraterrestrials have bases, likely on U.S. territory as alleged by
other whistleblowers, and the U.S. government was powerless to fully
monitor these bases.
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.16 Individual ‘contactees’ 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’.
There is reason to believe that the abduction phenomenon that emerged into the public consciousness with the famous Betty and Barney Hill case in 1961 was a direct result of alleged agreements reached with extraterrestrials.
That is not to
say that negative experiences with extraterrestrials or ‘abductions’
didn’t happen before the agreements, but that the agreements enabled
these abductions to increase at a rate which went far beyond
whatever government authorities originally approved.
Documentary evidence for the existence of such a secret organization emerged in 1987 with the discovery of a memo from President Eisenhower’s Special Assistant, Robert Cutler, to General Nathan Twining.
The memo referred to a schedule meeting for July 16, 1954 and referred to the “MJ-12 Special Studies Project”.
The above memo was found in the national archives and has been shown to be genuine.17 In another document ‘leaked’ to UFO researchers and known as the Eisenhower Briefing Document, Majestic-12 is described as having operational control of the UFO phenomenon:
The Briefing Document remains
controversial, but exhaustive archival analysis by researchers
strongly point to its authenticity.19
Significantly, Gray was appointed by President Truman to be the first director of the Psychological Strategy Board (PSB) established in 1951 and declared to be part of the CIA. In 1953, the PSB was replaced by the more powerful Operations Coordinating Board (OCB). It’s worth going into detail of the history and activities of both these organizations since they are related to management of the UFO phenomenon.
Furthermore, each organization involved
Col Corso, a military intelligence specialist, in various covert
operations while serving in the Eisenhower administration. It is
likely that service on these Boards gave Corso the background
information that formed his developed views on extraterrestrials and
support for the weaponization of Space.
The PSB was formally succeeded by the more powerful Operations Coordinating Board established by Executive Order 10483 on September 2, 1953 with the following charter:
Initially, the OCB was based at the
State Department and while formally authorized to report to the
National Security Council (NSC) and implement NSC decisions, it was
formally independent from the NSC. On February 25, 1957, Executive
Order 10700 formally incorporated the OCB into the NSC, which meant
the NSC had greater oversight and control of the OCB. The OCB was
officially ‘abolished’ by President Kennedy with Executive Order
10920 on February 18, 1961 that revoked Executive Order 10700.
According to his military records, Col Corso was assigned to both the Psychological Strategy Board and Operations Coordinating Board when serving with the Eisenhower administration from 1953-1956. Corso received numerous security clearances some of which gave him access to UFO information.
In his original notes, Corso writes:
Consequently, Corso’s service on both the PSB and OCB, and his access to UFO related information is evidence that both these bodies played critical roles in managing the UFO phenomenon through covert psychological operations. Furthermore, the OCB was not abolished by Kennedy in 1961 as generally thought since the revoking of Executive Order 10700 effectively made the OCB independent of the NSC rather than abolishing it.
Executive Order 10920 only removed the
OCB out of control and scrutiny of the Kennedy administration. This
made the OCB once again an independent interagency governmental
organization with significant power through the covert psychological
programs it managed, and an important implementing mechanism for the
even more mysterious
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:
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
There is intense debate over whether extraterrestrials involved in abductions and other intrusive activities described by Corso (commonly 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 - classified agreements between extraterrestrials and the
‘secret government’. In considering the ‘transformative’ vs.
‘take-over’ debate, it is vital to consider all the data and come up
with a nuanced response that takes into account different
extraterrestrial races performing activities. Visiting
extraterrestrials need to be distinguished on the basis of them
either being inside or outside the secret network of agreements
reached with the ‘secret government’.24
As far as the abduction phenomenon is concerned, it is very likely that these were made possible by, or accelerated as a result of, covert agreements by secret government authorities with one or more extraterrestrial civilizations.
Once one considers the vast secret
infrastructure created to develop
extraterrestrial technologies and
the illicit funding required for such an infrastructure, it becomes
clear that the national security threat posed by extraterrestrials
is INTERNAL rather than EXTERNAL.25
Corso’s depiction of extraterrestrials as an
external military threat to the U.S. is therefore not accurate.
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 and other intrusive actions.
Extraterrestrials that are trying to assist humanity, as described by these alleged contactees, are secretly being targeted by space weapons in order to capture their technology or the EBEs themselves. This also includes Grays from Zeta Reticulum who are involved in abductions that have reached agreements with the secret government.
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.26
In terms of the deploying space weapons, the deliberate targeting of extraterrestrial visitors needs to be exposed.
This requires briefing legislative officials in the U.S. and elsewhere so that a more appropriate policy response can be developed. There is a need to put a halt to the current U.S. policy of targeting extraterrestrial vehicles through the deployment of space based and other advanced weapons systems.
As Hellyer pointed out in his September 2005 speech:
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 the weaponization of space is
appropriate. This policy is justified, in Corso’s and other military
officials’ views, on the basis of the intrusive activities of
In short, what has emerged over the last 50 years or so is the creation of an ‘extraterrestrial enemy’ that justifies the development and deployment of space weapons according to Corso and other military officials. This takes us to the warnings of Dr Carol Rosin, a former spokeswoman to Dr Werner Von Braun, about a contrived extraterrestrial threat being the basis of a public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence.28 Such a contrived threat would direct public perceptions towards perceptions of extraterrestrials as unfriendly and a security threat. A more nuanced assessment based on the ‘internal’ versus ‘external threat’ posed by extraterrestrials is needed.
Consequently, in response to the profound policy question raised by Hellyer of whether weaponization of space is an appropriate policy response to the extraterrestrial visitors, the answer is NO. There is no need for a military response to the extraterrestrial visitors.
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 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:
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 Col Corso of weaponizing space and targeting extraterrestrial vehicles, is supported by many former and current military officials ‘in the loop’ about the extraterrestrial visitors. The development and use of space based 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.
More Information in "Weaponizing