Testimony of Dr. Hal Puthoff
Dr. Hal Puthoff, a theoretical and experimental physicist, is a graduate of Stanford University. He has published over forty technical papers in the areas of electron-beam devices, lasers, and quantum zero-point energy effects, and holds patents in the laser, communications, and energy fields. Dr. Puthoff’s professional background spans more than thirty years of research at General Electric, Sperry, the National Security Agency, Stanford University, SRI International, and, since 1985, as Director of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas, and President of EarthTech International, Inc. In his testimony, Dr. Puthoff points out that as we uncover the technologies that make space travel possible, we must consider the possibility that there are other civilizations who have been down this track ahead of us. This opens up the possibility of ET visitation. Considering that our electromagnetic technology is a century old, we must realize that there could be advanced civilizations out there that are millennia beyond us, and their technologies could be well beyond our imagination; therefore, the ET/UFO topic deserves to be taken seriously by modern scientists.
…[Regarding UFOs] Of course, we see claims, and not just among the public, but among military pilots and good observers, typically the military, that there appear to be something like craft flying around with anomalous behavior.
In terms of some of the characteristics that seem to be attributed to them, and given the kind of physics and the direction physics is going, you can’t rule out that maybe some are some kind of craft or probes. Maybe even more likely probes than craft, from some far away civilization.
But when you consider that our electromagnetic technology is a century old, basically you then realize that you could have advanced civilizations out there that are a millennia beyond us. You know, there really is no way of saying whether they might have some other way of making contact or find other ways like worm holes or whatever. It could be well beyond our imagination.
NORAD has ‘uncorrelated targets’ that they can’t account for, and, from time to time, satellites see things called fast walkers, which seem to be energetic signatures moving faster than can be accounted for by known planes for example…
Testimony of David Hamilton
David Hamilton works for the Department of Energy in the area of new generation power systems. He explains that we have nearly exhausted the world’s supply of fossil fuels, just at the time when Asia and China are undergoing an "industrial revolution" and are positioning to become bigger consumers of these fuels than the "first world" countries already are. In order to alleviate the current Earth crises of environmental pollution, global warming, etc. and advance as a sustainable technological society, we must develop technologies that don’t fit into the old paradigm.
We have designed a world that feeds on oil and those oil supplies are becoming more and more limited. Now if we look at what the supply of oil is, never before in our history have we been in a position where supply and demand would intersect. But in about 10 years we will see the intersection between supply and demand and that means that we will be seriously supply limited…
In working with the Russian universities, they did what I consider one of the best gravitational experiments ever done. It was at the High Temperature Materials Laboratory in Russia. They had done their experiment off-site and demonstrated that this device could develop a 35 percent reduction in the gravitational field.
Now we saw that. We were very impressed with it. The high gravitational researchers at DOE, I had them look at it. We were all interested in it. We would like to follow up on that to do a second type of experiment – duplication, reproducibility, getting back to the issues of how do you get good science. But you run into a lot of resistance among people. And in the Russian case it was even more so. When they were away from this off-site laboratory – it was across the street from the university, as I understand it – the place was completely ransacked.
All the equipment was lost. Now lucky for us they had their recordings, they had their videotapes, they had their presentation materials. All of that was still intact. But the machine was lost as well as a lot of the equipment necessary to duplicate that test.
It may have been that there were some Mafia type individuals involved, thinking that there might be some profit in this thing. And my Russian friends say that part of the government that does that sort of thing is no different from the Mafia. So that complicates the problem….
I am concerned that if we don’t do something very soon, any society that begins to be resource limited begins to eliminate the problem causing that resource limitation. And I would hate to see us get into the position where other people want to eliminate us or we have to eliminate them in order to continue our lifestyle. And that’s why it’s so important that we start now.
Testimony of Lieutenant Colonel Thomas E. Bearden (retired)
Colonel Bearden is a leading conceptualist in alternate energy technologies, electromagnetic bio-effects, unified field theory concepts, and other related areas. He is a retired Lieutenant Colonel of the U.S. Army and holds a Ph.D. and an M.S. in Nuclear Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology. He is currently CEO of CTEC, Inc., Director of the Association of Distinguished American Scientists, and Fellow Emeritus of the Alpha Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study. In Colonel Bearden’s testimony he speaks extensively about how it is possible to derive useable energy from the vacuum without violating any currently known laws of physics. He and others have built electromechanical devices which actually demonstrate this technology. He also explains how certain powers would rather keep this technology from becoming widely known outside of small esoteric circles. Time is running out however because our Earth does not have enough oil and coal reserves to last even for this generation. He explains how our top minds and scientists must first recognize then rally around an effort to solve this energy problem before 2004.
… We have the giant industrial economic cartels in energy. And it is not one cartel. It is many, many groups in energy. And each of those has become very powerful in its own area. And each one does not wish to see simple little electrical taps pulling out enormous energy from the vacuum. They would much rather see you burning a lot more oil and so forth…
Lethal force is used. I worked with an inventor, for example, Sparky Sweet, who is quite well known. He was shot at once by a sniper rifle from about 300 yards. The only thing that saved his life was, he was an old guy and very feeble, there towards that part of his life, and he stumbled as he was coming up the steps and he fell down. As his head went forward, the bullet went right by where his head was. And of course, the assassin was never found…
if we use this system where we extract energy from the vacuum we can clean up this biosphere. One of the greatest, most critical things facing us is that the supply of cheap oil has now peaked. We are there. What this means is we will continue to get some oil, yes. But it will be more and more and more expensive, year by year by year. Meanwhile, the demand for electricity goes up everywhere in the world, which drives the oil curve, again. And what you have is a classic escalation of prices type situation…
Well, what happens? Somewhere along the line of about 2008, the way I look at it and project it, we are going to have a world economic collapse. The economy cannot stand such increases as it is going to come. And God help us if we have a war in the Mid-East. But I believe by 2008, we will see the world economy collapse. Now, about a year before that, as the economies are crumbling and the stress on all these populations and all these leaders and all these nations increases so much, desperate people will do anything. Desperate leaders, particularly fanatical leaders will do anything…
The energy crisis going right now, in my view, will probably evoke a great Armageddon that we’ve all feared so long in about 2007, if we don’t solve the [energy] crisis. If we back up from that, it means the first quarter of 2004. These new energy devices had better be rolling off of the assembly lines like sausages or we can all forget it and go home. It’s too late to change it. That is how short a time we have.
I view this as the greatest strategic threat to [the] survival of the United States, and in fact, of civilization itself, that has ever existed in my lifetime…
We had one friend, for example, that we worked with very closely who built practical over-unity systems. He demonstrated at a conference, for example, an 8-kilowatt system. And then, very mysteriously he and his whole family disappeared. We have found out since that he is still around and he’s doing very well, because he was attired in a very expensive suit and a very nice automobile. He and his family are okay, even though they disappeared back then.
But here he had a successful unit that just flat disappeared off the face of the Earth. Now, its [disappearance] has to either be for the great financial empires, or it has to be for some kind of black project. And they classified it …
I really believe, through the auspices of the U.S. Government, we must bring [these technologies] forward to save ourselves and save the Earth. If we keep it secret, or if we keep it in the control group’s hands we shall all go down to oblivion in about 2007 …
I’ll make you a prediction. If the Government doesn’t move, there’s a 75% to 80% chance we will fail. We certainly won’t make the first quarter of 2004 [to get an operating energy device to replace fossil fuels]. And if we miss the first quarter of 2004, then we may as well all go home and enjoy our families for the time we have left because it is going to blow…
Everybody wants a modern life. They want to get out of the mud and the slime and everything and have lights and have things that are powered. And have industry and jobs and homes and schools. It’s a common striving from the human heart. And to try to do that the way we are doing it, we’ll destroy the planet and we will forcefully destroy each other. It seems to me, we just ought to be wiser than that.
Testimony of Dr. Eugene Mallove
Dr. Eugene Mallove is currently the Editor-In-Chief of the magazine Infinite Energy and Director of the New Energy Research Laboratory in New Hampshire. He holds two MIT degrees in Aeronautical-Astronautical Engineering and a Harvard Doctorate in Environmental Health Sciences (Air Pollution Control Engineering). He has broad experience in high-technology engineering at companies including Hughes Research Labs, TASC (The Analytic Science Corporation), and MIT Lincoln Laboratory. Dr. Mallove was the Chief Science Writer at MIT when the cold fusion story broke in March 1989, and he resigned in 1991 after his requested investigation into the fudged cold fusion data at MIT (which helped to discredit the whole subject) was not properly done. The marginalization by the scientific establishment of the cold fusion topic bears strong resemblance to the similar marginalization of the ET/UFO topic: both have been ridiculed and defamed because they break established paradigms. As Dr. Mallove states in this interview, "There is nothing worse…than suggesting to academic physicists in particular, and academics in general, that they are not only wrong; they are disastrously wrong, catastrophically wrong." In his magazine, Dr. Mallove has advised us to remember the sentiments of Michael Faraday: "Nothing is too wonderful to be true."
… We know for a fact, today, that the cold fusion low energy nuclear reactions are real. It’s a class of nuclear non-dangerous reactions producing dominantly heat, but also nuclear changes — a very beneficial type of powerful reaction. It is a commercially emerging technology in the hands of a number of companies…
There is absolutely no doubt about this. What that means is that in one cubic kilometer of ocean, if you fuse all the heavy hydrogen, which is just one sixty-five hundredth of that cubic kilometer of ocean, that would equal the oil energy from combusting all the known oil reserves on Earth…
There has been an extraordinary abrogation of basic legal responsibility at the Patent Office and at the Department of Energy on the matter of cold fusion. Cold fusion patents have not been approved. The only way of approving any patent that resembles cold fusion is to eliminate the words cold fusion or anything like it. Certain people have done that and succeeded. The Patterson power cell is one such example. It was an age acceleration clause (because of the age of Dr. Patterson) that helped him, and he went through a different art group at the Patent Office.
But predominantly, if the patent goes through a certain gentleman at the Patent Office today whose name is Harvey, he will reject all such patents. They will not get through. American citizens are being denied their constitutional rights in this particular case. There is no question about it. We have a complete audit trail on that. Yes, there is serious criminal activity going on that ultimately must be rooted out if the cold fusion and new energy revolution are to go forward. If it doesn’t get rooted out, you will not be able to have a commercial infrastructure …
There is nothing worse, I found, than suggesting to academic physicists in particular, and academics in general, that they are not only wrong; they are disastrously wrong, catastrophically wrong…
Testimony of Dr. Paul LaViolette
Dr. Paul LaViolette has written four books and has published many original papers in physics, astronomy, climatology, systems theory, and psychology. He received his BA in physics from Johns Hopkins, his MBA from the University of Chicago, and PhD from Portland State University, and is currently president of the Starburst Foundation, an interdisciplinary scientific research institute. He is the developer of subquantum kinetics, a novel approach to microphysics that accounts for electric, magnetic, gravitational, and nuclear forces in a unified manner and resolves many long-standing physics problems. Based on the predictions of this theory, he developed an alternative cosmology that effectively replaces the big bang theory. Dr. LaViolette has also developed a new theory of gravity that replaces the deeply flawed theory of general relativity. Predicted from subquantum kinetics, it accounts for the electrogravitic coupling phenomenon discovered by Townsend Brown and may explain the advanced aerospace propulsion technology utilized in the B-2 bomber. In addition to his understanding of UFO and black budget craft propulsion systems, including materialization and dematerialization, he has deep knowledge of the inner workings of the U.S. Patent Office. He states in this interview that, currently, if an invention doesn’t fit into the accepted physics paradigm, the patent examiners immediately reject it thinking it violates the paradigm and must be a mistake. In effect, new energy technologies are the underdog: They don’t fit the paradigm so they are left out of the needed funding, or their patents are denied — even to the point that the Patent Office is breaking the law. In order to alleviate the current Earth crises of environmental pollution, global warming, etc. and advance as a technological society, we need technologies that don’t fit into the old paradigm.
… Let’s say there was a Roswell crash, and the National Security Agency was formed to keep this all classified. Now, something like that is a very emotional experience [with] some of your Government officials. You realize there is extraterrestrial life, and they have this advanced technology. When you become very emotional about something, one reaction is to hide it and then see how we can use this for ourselves — we’ve got to keep one step ahead of the other countries. At that time we had a Cold War with the Soviet Union, so the rationale was to use it for military purposes.
Suppose the same thing happened 100 years ago at the time the automobile was developed? I sincerely believe we’d still be driving horses and buggies today, because it would be feared that the automobile could change warfare. It would mean a much higher speed of travel, and obviously, we should classify this. At that time there wasn’t the same mechanism in place; we didn’t have the NSA and this major program to contain advanced technologies.
We think of science as being based on observation and being open to change, but as you learn more about it and about the scientists themselves, you realize how much it is a religion. It is very closed [and] resistive to changing its fundamental principles…
There was a case of a Canadian fellow who had developed a technology for producing enough power to power your house, out of something about the size of a shoebox. It was a new way of wiring something up — some sort of non-linear device. He was very open about it and [about] publicizing it. One day his house was surrounded by SWAT teams and all of his equipment was confiscated. He was arrested on the grounds that he was harboring terrorist technology or weaponry, and he was released only after he had signed something that said he would not continue doing work in this area. Now he is mowing lawns for a living…
The Patent Office, in its current approach, is actually breaking the law. It is trying to make happy the physicists who are with the American Physical Society — to keep them in power with their ideas, you might say, and withhold from public use good inventions that could solve our problems, like the energy crisis. There is a whole pattern of this going on at the Patent Office. I personally know it, because I was at the Patent Office for about a year and I know some people there, and I know some of the things that were going on. For example, there was somebody I know who issued a patent on a process of sending signals faster than the speed of light. This was then made fun of by Robert Park on his website. Through their connections, they had this posted somewhere as the most ridiculous patent of the year award — this sort of thing…
They can say what they want; it’s freedom of speech, but for the Patent Office to do their bidding instead of following the law — that is illegal…
Testimony of Mr. Fred Threlfall
Mr. Threlfall was a communications instructor in the Royal Canadian Air Force at RCAF Station Toronto in 1953, when he witnessed an experiment involving the successful dematerialization and re-materialization of an object. Because of his top clearance, he was also able to check out from the base library, original films of gun camera footage from WWII planes. Many times, while watching these films, he noticed UFOs in the footage — different positions, different shapes, but, definitely UFOs. He has also himself seen UFOs maneuvering in the sky.
…While in Toronto stationed at an air station as an instructor in 1953, I observed an unusual experiment. I had just finished an experiment and I was on my way back to my classroom. There’s this one experiment that was going on and it was in an approximately four-by-four enclosed glass enclosure inside this room. On a cabinet there was a large glass ashtray. I said, what’s going on. Oh, we’ve got an experiment underway and we have a similar device in the other room with no ashtray. So we’re talking away and one of the scientists said go ahead. Next thing, that ashtray wasn’t sitting there. Everyone went into the next room and was excited as can be, because the ashtray was sitting there. So it dematerialized and materialized…
Testimony of Dr. Ted Loder
Dr. Ted Loder is a respected scientist and oceanography professor at the University of New Hampshire. After learning from his cousin, Brigadier General Stephen Lovekin, that the ET/UFO subject is not only real but is the key to technologies that could preserve our Earth’s environment while advancing humanity into a sustainable planetary society, he has become an outspoken advocate for ending the secrecy surrounding this subject. He has worked to introduce students, other scientists, and legislators to the fact that humans are not alone in the universe.
Back to Contents
4.0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONSBY PUBLIC, PRIVATE AND GOVERNMENTAL STAKEHOLDERS
4.1 Recommended Press and Public Actions
The role of the press in this disclosure effort is critical to its success and the acceptance of the facts by the American public and academic institutions in a non-threatening, but intelligent and interested manner. It usually becomes obvious to anyone studying this field that the American press has played an important role over the last half century in helping spread disinformation and shaping the public’s views on UFO/ET issues. The press has often been an unknowing partner in the distribution of misinformation/disinformation or a knowing partner in the refusal to report real events. It is exceedingly rare that major sightings are reported at the national level. When reports are made, they often done in a condescending, slanted, "add the giggle factor" manner that leaves the audience confused and turned off. Two recent exceptions were the report of the Phoenix Lights story in USA Today by Richard Price and the Boston Globe report on the French COMETA report by Leslie Kean. Both articles were well researched and presented in a balanced, non-judgmental manner.
We recommend the press take the following actions:
1. We recommend that reporters writing on this topic familiarize themselves with the evidence and the implications of this topic. It is felt by many who have studied the UFO/ET issue that it is the most important issue facing the world today. This importance should be conveyed to the readers in a responsible serious manner;
2. We recommend that media organizations assign these issues to senior, well-respected, nationally-recognized journalists and reporters. These issues should no longer be confined to filler articles assigned to junior staff or relegated to entertainment programming;
3. We recommend that the present clichés of reporting on these issues, which maybe intended to "dumb down" the topic by conveying a non-serious and silly tone to the reporting, be eliminated. These include the use of opening statements such as "little green men" and the filming of interviewees with weird camera angles, colored lights, fog generators and the like. All of these techniques, which have been successfully used for decades to "spin" the topic, must be eliminated if the public is to believe the seriousness of your reporting.
We recommend the public take the following actions:
1. We recommend that the public open their minds to UFO/ET issues by thoughtfully investigating the issues themselves;
2. We recommend that the public, once recognizing the implications of a disclosure, encourage the press and public officials to research and report responsibly on them and further to take part in a dialogue addressing a dramatically transformed view of humans on this planet and their future place as part of a larger group of intelligent beings;
3. We recommend that the public write the President and ask that he issue an executive order permitting witnesses to safely come forward (see section on Presidential actions) and write their senators and representatives requesting that they sponsor open hearings where these witnesses may testify.
4. We recommend that former government, military or corporate persons with knowledge about this subject and willingness to be witnesses, contact the Disclosure Project to help make their knowledge public in an honorable and patriotic manner. We have protective measures in place, and the more witnesses we have, the stronger the case – and the greater the margin of safety for all concerned;
5. Ultimately, if the people will lead, the leaders will follow. Courage, vision and perseverance are needed to transform this situation, and create a time of openness and trust. If our leaders currently lack this courage and vision, then we must manifest it for them since ultimately the public will help drive the disclosure effort.
Back to Contents
4.2 Recommended Congressional Actions
Considering the incredible importance and implications of this subject, Congress has played an almost negligible role over the past four to five decades. In fact only two formal hearings have been held during that time period. The first was held by the House Armed Services Committee on April 5, 1966 because of strong editorial and public criticism of the Air Force Project Blue Book UFO program. Then Representative Gerald Ford of Michigan was a strong supporter of the hearings, in part as a result of major sightings that had occurred during March of that year in his state and seen by hundreds of people and reported widely in the press. The result of the hearings was the recommendation for an independent scientific investigation of UFOs, which became the University of Colorado "Scientific Study of UFOs" directed by Dr. Edward Condon.
Then in 1968, the House Science and Astronautics Committee held a "Symposium on Unidentified Flying Objects" to review the scientific evidence for UFOs. Of the six scientists who testified, five opinioned that there was a valid scientific anomaly that should be studied further. In fact, one of the scientists, Dr. James McDonald, a senior physicist and professor at the University of Arizona, concluded that, "My own study of the UFO problem has convinced me that we must rapidly escalate serious scientific attention to this extra-ordinarily intriguing puzzle." A year later the Condon Committee concluded that there was no convincing scientific evidence for UFOs and recommended that Project Blue Book be terminated, which happened later that year on December 17. This surprising conclusion was reached in spite of the fact that about 30% of the cases investigated by the committee had remained unexplained. In the 1990s, the refusal of the Air Force to even comment on the growing evidence of a crash near Roswell, NM lead then Representative Steven Schriff (R-NM) to request that the General Accounting Office conduct a search for related documents. In 1995 the GAO released a report stating that they could not find documents related to the crash as documents from Roswell Army Base from that time period had been improperly destroyed.
Then in early April, 1997 the CSETI organization held a closed briefing for members of congress and civilian witnesses in the hopes that someone in Congress would have the courage to hold hearings on this topic. No one then nor until today has had the courage to call for hearings on this topic, even though the statement made by Rep Gerald Ford in 1966 that "We owe it to the people to establish credibility regarding UFOs," is as true today as it was then. It is interesting to note that the members of the Senate have never held any hearings on this subject although privately individuals have expressed significant interest in the subject.
We recommend that Congress take the following actions to pursue this matter:
Make directed inquiries to contacts and chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees;
Inquire directly to the various facilities, agencies and entities listed (section 5.1.3);
Pursue other contacts known to the Congress, which may be able to assist in identifying points of control for these operations.
Purse this matter further by convening Congressional Hearings whereby direct witnesses to these projects may testify. We believe more than one member of Congress should be located to co-sponsor such an inquiry.
Pass a Congressional ban on weapons in space and encourage our allies and the UN to do the same.
Note that once issues concerning the validity of National Security oaths (Section 4.7.2) and amnesty (Section 4.7) are resolved by congress and/or presidential order, there are hundreds of potential witnesses who are willing to testify on the reality of the UFO/ET issues and their implications for our country’s future.
It is only through the medium of open and public congressional hearings that an understanding of the complexity of these issues may be achieved and our country can move forward.
Because of the interconnections between the UFO issue and the world’s energy status and technology, it will also be necessary to also hold Congressional Hearings on these energy issues as well, as a pursuant, but somewhat parallel process.
Once the reality of the UFO issues are accepted by Congress, then we recommend that Congress:
Thoroughly investigate these new technologies both from current civilian sources as well as compartmented projects within military, intelligence and corporate contracting areas.
Authorize the declassification and release of information held within compartmented projects related to this subject.
Specifically prohibit the seizing or suppression of such technologies.
Authorize substantial funding for basic research and development by civilian scientists and technologists making this research available to the public and mainstream scientists.
Develop plans for dealing with disclosing such technologies and for the transition to a non-fossil fuel economy
The Disclosure Project stands ready to assist the Congress in any way possible to facilitate use of these new energy sources. We can recommend a number of individuals who can be subpoenaed to provide testimony on such technologies, as well as people who have information on unacknowledged special access projects within covert government operations that are already working with these issues.
Back to Contents
4.3 Recommended Military Actions
Since the early 1990s, the Director and members of the Disclosure Project have briefed various high level military officials including the Head of Intelligence Joint Staff (J-2), the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Director of Central Intelligence, Wright Patterson Director of National Air Intelligence Center and others. It has become obvious to us during these briefings that senior officers have not been informed on this subject. This constitutes a serious threat to the national security and to military readiness.
To quote Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, "I urge immediate congressional action to reduce the dangers from secrecy about Unidentified Flying Objects." Note that here he is emphasizing the dangers from secrecy, not danger arising from UFOs.
We recommend senior military and national security leaders take the following actions:
Receive a thorough briefing on the subject by the Disclosure Project leadership and military/civilian witnesses;
Fully brief CINCS (Commander in Chiefs), and develop special ROEs (Rules of Engagement) for ETI/UFO encounters;
Independently investigate the subject and penetrate USAP (Unacknowledged Special Access Projects, see section 3.4) operations related to the subject;
Become fully involved in covert projects related to the subject to ensure that such projects are adequately supervised and are under the direct and continuous control of the constitutional chain of command;
Correct and/or restrain any USAP’s covert misuse of advanced technologies or weapon systems related to UFOs;
Attempt peaceful, cooperative engagement of these life forms and assiduously avoid violent military engagement;
Carefully reconsider the deployment of space-based military assets in light of the above information and avoid actions that might be viewed as bellicose or hostile by extraterrestrial life forms.
More details on these recommendations are found in section 5.1, "Operational Readiness and the Unidentified Flying Object/Extraterrestrial Intelligence Subject."
Back to Contents
4.4 Recommended Scientific Community Actions
As observations of the UFO phenomena reported by many thousands of witnesses worldwide (see sections 3.8 and 7.0 for some documented examples) are validated, a new set of scientific paradigms will need to be researched to explain what is being observed. Twentieth century scientific theories have barely touched the surface in explaining what numerous scientific, military and civilian witnesses have observed and reported. However, in some cases, covert military research programs appear to have advanced much further in understanding the observed phenomena and technologies (based on witness testimonies, section 3.8) than have our academic and public scientists. Recent findings, such as the demonstration of possible faster than speed of light phenomenon, suggest that indeed there will be a whole new class of scientific phenomena that 21st scientists will investigate to explain what has been declared as "impossible" by scientists of the last century.
There is still a major acceptance problem about UFO/ET issues with most scientists. Dr. Peter Sturrock, a highly respected solar physicist and now an emeritus professor at Stanford University, summarized the problem as follows:
"The definite resolution of the UFO enigma will not come about unless and until the problem is subjected to open and extensive scientific study by the normal procedures of established science. This requires a change in attitude primarily on the part of scientists and administrators in universities."
A further view by Dr. Sturrock on the role of scientists and scientific journals is quoted in section 3.2.1. Surprising though it may seem to the lay person, scientists often have trouble changing their understanding of processes and natural phenomena when faced with evidence that their theories may not be correct. The history of science is replete with examples of scientists proclaiming such and such is impossible, only to be shown later that their assumptions were incorrect. This normal human tendency is certainly not limited to scientists. (For example, for a number of years after the Wright brother’s planes had been observed flying by thousands of people, there were still popular articles proclaiming that flying is impossible.) Furthermore, most scientific research in the United States, especially in colleges and universities, is colleague-driven through the peer review process for promotion and tenure as well as for grants and journal publications. Stepping outside the bounds of peer accepted research often spells difficulty for the scientist, even if they are well established in more conventionally accepted scientific areas. Consequently, the vast majority of academics are not willing to take such a risk, since it is safer to remain with the accepted views of the day.
Over the last century, scientists have played both an active and passive role, often unknowingly, in shaping the attitudes of the "trusting" public on the UFO issue through promulgation of misinformation and disinformation. Since the 1950s, scientists have been used to persuade the public that there is "no scientific evidence" of UFO phenomena. High profile scientists are still playing that role today, as did one of the leaders in the SETI program who stated in a recent public guest lecture at Harvard University that "there is no scientific evidence of the existence of UFOs." There are several possible explanations for this statement. Either she was unaware of the depth of evidence on the subject, in which case she could have qualified her authoritative pronouncement, or she knew that the subject was real but there were motivations which inadvertently mislead the public in order to gain more support to expand SETI research. Either way, scientists need to be more honest with the public, who for the most part still trust them and their pronouncements.
In summary, without investigation and research, there can be no intelligent informed statement on the phenomena. This need was also recommended by a panel of scientists in the Sturrock/Rockefeller report and by scientists and military personnel in the French COMETA report summarized in section 8.0.
We recommend scientists take the following actions:
1. Scientists must open their minds to the possibility of the UFO/ET phenomenon and stop prejudging others who are researching this area. This will require each to do their own "research" into the matter;
2. Scientists who know the UFO/ET issues are real (such as those who participate in covert research projects) should share the reality and their understanding with scientific colleagues to start to bring them up to speed. There will be a lot of catching up to do and it will be difficult because of reputations and funding issues;
3. Academic scientists should share this knowledge with their students and the public, for it is the next generation of students and graduate students that will help make the breakthroughs in research to explain what has been observed for several generations;
4. It is critical that scientists help make the study of UFO/ET issues a supported and encouraged area of scientific investigation for these future graduate students and young professional scientists;
5. Scientist/managers who run our federally funded academic research programs should set aside a small percentage of their budgets for ‘outside-the-box’ research into the UFO/ET arena, helping to make it a legitimate area of research.
6. Finally, scientists should realize that advances in science and technology that could come from an understanding of the UFO/ET phenomenon will have far ranging effects on the future of the people and the environment of our planet. The opportunities for new ‘breakthrough’ research have never been better (as well as the opportunity to rewrite many textbooks).
Back to Contents
4.5 Recommended Actions for the President of the United States
Although Presidents since World War II have known about the reality of the UFO/ET issues, in recent decades their knowledge and ability to affect the issues have become limited. It is time for the president to take a proactive role in the disclosure process, because should significant disclosures occur without any presidential role, the president would be viewed by the American public and the world in one of two perhaps equally damaging ways.
1. If the President and the executive branch of the U.S. government maintain that they did not know anything about a subject this important, presidential stature and credibility would be significantly damaged.
2. If the President and the executive branch maintain after "unsanctioned" disclosures that they knew of the subject and its incredible national significance, but were not connected to the disclosure, the President might be accused of supporting the cover-up, even though this may be unfair in light of the actual facts of how this subject has been covertly handled.
Either way it behooves the President to begin the disclosure process with the following steps or one of the above damaging options may become the prevailing view.
1. We recommend that the President set forth an Executive Order releasing witnesses from national security oaths on this subject since a critical issue for witnesses willing to testify is their security oaths, even though they may have been illegally obtained (see section 4.7 on security oaths);
We recommend that the President convene an independent, fair and open commission to investigate the subject, USAPs connected to the subject, and technologies that are currently clarified and could benefit humanity if released;
2. We recommend at the same time that the Executive Order support the declassification of government documents related to the UFO/ET subject, a process that has already begun through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA);
3. We also recommend, as the disclosure process proceeds, that the President issue an Executive Order providing amnesty for members of the suspected group and its personnel that control the UFO/ET issues, provided that there is cooperation and non-interference by that group;
4. We recommend that the President present a nationally televised talk on the issues and the process to start to restore public faith in the government and democratic principles;
5. Finally, we recommend that the President create by Executive Order, a new scientific research organization to develop covert technologies that can be used to address our energy problems and start to integrate these technologies into our mainstream academic institutions.
These Executive Orders would fully utilize the powers of the presidency to help terminate certain "black projects" activities that appear to be operating outside the constitutional chain of command. While certain aspects of extraterrestrial technology (and other matters) may not be fully accessed through this EO process, it would enable definite witness testimony to be disclosed. This would start the process of neutralizing the present efforts by the covert groups to keep the President and the Executive branch, Congress, the press, and the taxpayers out of the loop.
Back to Contents
4.7 Amnesty Issues and Security Oaths
4.7.1 Why Amnesty?
One of the major stumbling blocks to disclosure is that those involved with the cover up are afraid of retribution once the government and the people realize the depth and extent of deceit that has occurred over the last half century. We citizens should not condone what those have done, but nor should we punish them. We citizens must be prepared to forgive. There is nothing to be gained by calling for severe retribution for those involved with either current or past secrecy. Although some individuals have acted to end this secrecy, such as the witnesses who have contributed testimony in sections 3.6 and 3.8, many others may have felt they were doing the right thing at the time, which often continues until today. Our world does not need a cosmic Watergate, and we must collectively renounce it.
We must be willing to look to the moment and to the future, and forgive the past. Even though our culture wants to blame and hold someone accountable, we need to offer complete amnesty to all those involved in suppressing the truth. There is international precedent for this approach, such as shown by South Africa in recent years. There is precedent in the US as well. For example, in the early days of the Clinton Administration, there were sweeping disclosures about past excesses and crazy experiments within the Department of Energy, and the former Atomic Energy Commission. We learned of plutonium being put on the oatmeal of kids in orphanages, of deliberate radiation releases in populated areas to see ‘what would happen’, and so forth. This truth came out, and the world did not end. Nobody had to go to jail. The government did not collapse, and the sky did not fall. Let us move forward, with some real compassion and forgiveness, and begin this century anew.
Our president must take the lead on this amnesty issue as was noted in the section on Recommended Presidential Actions. It is our understanding that the people of the United States are ready to move forward and as the saying goes, if the people will lead, the leaders will follow. The stakes are too high to look the other way while our future is stolen from us. Courage, vision and perseverance are needed to transform this situation, and create a time of openness, trust and to lay the foundation for both global and inter-planetary peace. If our leaders currently lack this courage and vision, then we must manifest it for them.
Back to Contents
4.7.2 Evaluating the Validity of National Security Oaths Related to the UFO/Extraterrestrial Subject (1996)
copyright Steven M. Greer M.D., 21 October 1996
A number of first hand military, intelligence and government-associated witnesses to covert projects dealing with UFOs and Extraterrestrial Intelligence (ETI) have been identified by the Disclosure Project’s effort. Over the past three years, we have located several dozen such potential witnesses as part of a comprehensive strategy to collect adequate evidence for a global, definitive disclosure on this subject. The story which these important government witnesses can tell will make a credible, undeniable case for the reality of UFOs and the existence of extraterrestrial life forms in proximity to the Earth.
One of the persistent obstacles to this testimony coming out into the public arena has been the issue of so-called national security oaths and restrictions placed on these witnesses. Some feel that they are not free to speak unless ‘released’ from these national security oaths and restrictions, and so we have been working to encourage Congress and the White House to take actions that would remove these restrictions.
In the summer of 1995, a number of these witnesses gathered at a witnesses’ summit and signed a letter to President Clinton asking him to take actions leading to the release of these restrictions. While receipt of this letter was acknowledged by a special assistant to the President, we still await specific action from the executive branch of the US government (Note that we still are waiting in 2001).
With this said, it is important to visit the question of whether or not such national security oaths and restrictions are themselves legally valid.
We have compelling witness testimony that the operations dealing with this subject currently exist, and have existed for several decades, outside of normal governmental projects. Members of the Disclosure Project team have met with very senior members of the Administration, Congress, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA and other relevant government agency operatives. The picture which emerges from these discussions is that of an operation dealing with UFOs which is functioning outside of the normal channels of government, as it is usually considered. Indeed, we have found that the most senior levels of the executive branch, Congress, the military, etc. are totally out of the loop on this extraordinary matter.
This then brings up the sobering question of who is in the loop, and under what authorization are such projects operating? It is our assessment that for the large part, these operations do not fall under any constitutionally sanctioned avenues of authorization, and as such are, perforce, illegal.
Aside from the lack of oversight and authorization from the executive branch and Congress, these operations have, from time to time, engaged in deceptive practices, which have frustrated the organs of constitutionally legal inquiries and democratic processes. Any such operation which behaves in this fashion unilaterally removes itself from the inherent legality and protection which exists for projects which are consonant with constitutional law.
This being the case (we are eager — nay, desperate — for someone to prove otherwise) all of the so-called "national security oaths" and other "restrictions" placed on military, intelligence and government contract workers are null and void. That is, they appear to have no legal validity since the operations for which they were obtained are themselves illegal. In a constitutional democracy, it is a basic requirement of law that such operations be constitutionally legal, and if they are not, then all that flows from them — including such "oaths" — are illegal and therefore non-binding. IF these operations are legal, nobody in the Congress, executive branch or senior military with whom we have spoken knows of it. The production of a single current executive order or congressional directive authorizing these projects, which can be independently verified, would convince us otherwise.
More than one covert contact has told us that, indeed, any such witnesses can and should speak out at the right time and place since no legal entity would — or legally could — do anything about it. We agree.
Beyond this, it is the legal, moral and patriotic duty of such witnesses to come together, and at the highest, best and most credible venue possible, speak out in unison regarding the truth on this matter. Granted, if only one or two such persons come forward, the case will be weak, and the risk will be unacceptable. But if ten, twenty or more such witnesses come together, and united, resolve to share their information and experiences on this subject, then a definitive case will be made , and a great service to the world and their country will be fulfilled.
The return of this matter to the legal channels of government and the deliberation of the people is one of the great unfulfilled tasks of the post cold war era. Over half a decade has elapsed since the end of the cold war, and there can no longer be a justification (if there ever was) for this type of extraordinary secrecy and covert agenda. Both national and world security requires that this matter be returned to the world community as soon as possible.
We recommend that men and women of vision, courage and dedication join with us in fulfilling this task. Far from being a legal violation of ‘security oaths’, the public testimony by such witnesses is a highly moral and legal act. Further, is it not true that the continuation of this secrecy itself is illegal and immoral, given the inherent unconstitutionality of such programs? Credible witnesses, joining together and providing their testimony in a united strategy can return this subject to legal oversight and control, and thereby enable the people of our country and of the world to begin the public deliberations which should have occurred 50 years ago.
Back to Contents