I received a further communication from
Clay and Shawn Pickering (reproduced
far below) regarding their effort to clarify what has
transpired so far concerning the secret meetings held from February
12-14, 2008 at the United Nations New York headquarters. Their
clarification emerged from more recent discussions with their
source, currently a member of the diplomatic corps with a background
in the US military (Source A) who initially disclosed the secret
Their comments offer a useful summary of
what Source A has revealed so far, and the importance of his
testimony. Given that a second source, Gilles Lorant, has
publicly emerged with testimony of what happened at the UN UFO
meetings, there is now a way to compare the two testimonies.
We can now identify similarities and
inconsistencies between the two testimonies to determine the
credibility of the sources, and what actually occurred at the
To begin, it's important to note that while Source A has
revealed his professional credentials to
Clay and Shawn Pickering, and to Robert
Morningstar, Source A has chosen to remain
anonymous. This makes it difficult for public verification of his
background and reliability. In contrast, Gilles Lorant, after
initially releasing information anonymously, came forward to
publicly reveal himself.
Lorant's public emergence made it easier
to confirm his credibility as a primary witness to the UN meeting.
His professional background as an auditor associated with the
Federation European AIRPLANE (FEA) supported the
reliability of his testimony. A number of prominent French
researchers also came forward to support Lorant's credibility and/or
These included Michel Ribardiere(read below
insert), President of the FEA, and Gildas Bourdais who is a
highly regarded French UFO researcher.
Both Ribardiere and Bourdais regarded
Lorant as a credible witness.
After the recent rumors inside ufological community
about the alleged UN UFO meeting and the alleged
attendee I have decided to acquire additional
confirmation of the whole story.
The background of the whole issue you can find
Sure enough I was able to get in touch with Mr.
Michel Ribardiere who is a president of FEA
(Federation of European AIRPLANE), French group that
is researching aero-ufology and have good contacts
with figures from French Defense and Research.
Recent interview of Jean-Jacques Yvars
(secretary of FEA) by French researcher Grelet
Christophe (Garlet has also recently done
interview with me too):
Additional background info of FEA;
Federation AIRPLANE is originally a French
association, under the 1901 law, born in
February 2007. It carries out public
communication can be used as advertising
material for large companies or institutions
that support it. In addition, it prepares the
presentation of research projects and public
communication of a European dimension, in the
grant programs of the Council of Europe.
Projects that will
meet the needs of future populations on the
subject being sensitive, Aerospace Unidentified
phenomena. It brings together experiences of
Defense, technology and scientific research. In
addition to the breadth of the initiatives of
the European Federation AIRPLANE for the general
public, a large number of eminent figures from
the Defense and Research, have agreed to
cooperate with and image of credibility.
Complementing technically, several professionals
achieve audio visual, imagery, as well as the
media, have given their engineering selflessly."
As it was already
reported, it seems that the member of FEA, Mr.
Gilles Lorant, has been present at the February UN
meetings about UFO phenomena and its implications to
the modern society and states. It was reported that
Gilles Lorant is a member of National Center
for Scientific Research CNRS and Institute of the
In-depth Studies IHEDN.
I am pasting you in the text below original message
that I have received from Mr. Michel Ribardiere.
At the moment I am trying to acquire an telephone
interview with Mr. Lorant so we could learn
additional details so stay tuned.
I have received permission to forward Mr.
Ribardiere's english statement to UFO Updates and
other mailing lists and forum.
My previous contacts with the French community and
figures you can find in the following links; My
interview with the Jacques Patenet, head of
GEIPAN - prior to the AP mainstream story about the
release of French UFO archive (listen below mp3
Hrvatska Radio Televizija - Croatian National
Television emisija NA RUBU ZNANOSTI Prisavlje 3
10000 Zagreb Croatia, Europe
From: president [mailto: XXXblackedoutXXX@XXXblackedoutXXX]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 12:19 AM
To: Giuliano Marinkovic
Subject: Re: UN Meeting and other questions?
Dear Mr Giuliano Marinkovic,
Thank you for your letter.
I had a look on you
statistics of the Geipan Data and we know that there
are very close from the official statistics that
have been given by Mr Sillard the president of the
comity that pilots the
GEIPAN. When you
pick up the observations of type C, the observations
of type D are around 27%.
Now I'm listening your show and it sounds very good.
Dear Mr Giuliano Marinkovic,
About the meetings that took place at the United
Nations in New York, Mr. Gilles Lorant who is
a member of our organization has been invited to
participate. He was invited by the Embassy of the
United Nations to carry out an audit on the
operation of the United Nations for his company.
However, he was unable attended the three meetings
that followed the alleged meeting announced by Mr
Salla, which reportedly took place at the
beginning of the week.
The meetings he could attend as a listener only,
took place behind closed doors at the request of
three senators of the United States on 13 and 14
These meetings were a follow-up to the meeting that
took place earlier this week.
The purpose of these meetings were to discuss the
elements that can cause social crises in
industrialized countries in times of economic
I would like to point out that
applied to the persons invited to these meetings
has absolutely nothing to do with what is described
elsewhere. Security is less than that practiced in
an international airport.
28 nations were represented by about forty people.
There was also a turn over of Representatives.
On both days, during those three meetings, the
subject of UFOs was discussed during a maximum
of 1:30 hour
The UFO subject has been seen as one reason
that may affect social equilibrium of a nation,
considering the high probability of economic
recession, the speech of contacted, charlatans
figures, religious, some scientists and prophecies.
Manifestations of UFO further sharply the risk of
social unrest threatening to their political system
some emerging democracies.
According to our member, the information probably
the most interesting is the following: it was
suggested by the United Nations to representatives
of nations to prepare people about UFOs.
This opening could be held under two conditions:
1) That social
peace in the G8 countries is guaranteed around
the liberal model (US version)
2) By the end of 2009, that the demonstrations
annoying "our neighbors" persist throughout the
suggestion is not a measure and has not been passed
but has only been suggested.
Moreover, it was discussed the position to adopt in
the case or a non-aligned nation decided to overtake
the countries gathered on the formalization of the
However, it can be seen as a symbolic indication on
the part of the community land in response to
manifestations, resulting from the non-terrestrial
A message which would
"If you continue
your manifestations by the end of 2009, we agree
to reveal your presence."
According to our
members, representatives of the nations were serene.
There was an atmosphere of complicity grateful
implied the presence of "our neighbors" in our
Although Dominique Strauss-Kahn was not seen
by our member and he was officially in Asia, his
name was announced as each of the people who have
entered. We do not know if he was there personally
or if he was represented.
At present we do not know whether those meetings,
which do not appear in the schedule of formal
meetings of the UN are considered official meetings
or private meetings.
Sometimes, organizations or nations reserve rooms
for private meetings.
This detail is important because in cases those
meetings would be official then a formal reports
should be issued to the attention of nations that
could not attend the meetings. And it will be
possible to have more details at the end of March
from the UN.
Mr. Lorant is a very busy person, but he has
just accepted a confrontation with Mr. Salla
to be held soon for a French radio.
After intense scrutiny in France over Lorant's credentials,
controversy erupted over his claimed professional association with a
prestigious French scientific organization, the Institute of
National Higher Defense Studies (IHEDN).
This led to the FEA requesting his
resignation which Lorant submitted on March 6 (read below insert).
The subsequent controversy over him
inaccurately reporting his association with IHEDN, does raise a
question mark over the reliability of his testimony. It may simply
be Lorant overstated his professional association with IHEDN and
that this does not unduly impact on what he claims to have
experienced at the UN on February 13 and 14.
The F.E.A asks for M. GILLES LORANT's resignation
In consideration of the external pressures made on M.
Gilles Lorant, he gave us a denial concerning his
participation to the IHEDN as an auditor. Remind that
this information had pushed the F.E.A to introduce M.
Gilles Lorant as an auditor of the IHEDN in a public
Considering the embarrassing position that this denial
imposes to the F.E.A, its board of directors has decided
to request his immediate resignation to M. Gilles Lorant.
M. Gilles Lorant complied yesterday March 6th, 2008,
before the board directors and is no longer a member of
Concerning the very sensible informations about his
travel at the U.N in February 2008, which were released
by M. Gilles Lorant, the F.E.A no longer can supports
nor confirms M. Gilles Lorant's allegations.
However, the article will remain online as documentary
and must now be considered, as an element of a fiction
scenario in which U.N. took into consideration the
official release disclosed to the public at large on the
subject of UFOs.
Considering the maneuvers which are at the start of the
infiltration of many foreign ufological research
associations, by unscrupulous individuals, having
sometimes worked for sabotage operations, the F.E.A
reserves the possibility to bring this whole affair
before the justice.
Source : F.E.A (Service communication)
Lorant's public emergence and previous
endorsements by independent experts gives some confidence in his
reliability as a witness. Controversy over the precise nature of his
professional associations, however, makes is unclear whether his
testimony can be concluded to be any more reliable than Source A who
It is important to note that Source A claims to only have
attended a meeting on February 12, and did not refer to or claim to
have attended any follow up meetings. In contrast, Gilles Lorant
claims to have attended follow up meetings on February 13 and 14,
but not that on February 12. So there may be some genuine
differences between what these two sources encountered at the
successive meetings in terms of confidentiality, security and
It is appropriate to first discuss the
commonalities between the two sources which will help confirm what
transpired, and the significance of the information released.
Both sources refer to a secret UN meeting that occurred on
the morning of February 12. They also refer to the increase in UFO
sightings as an important issue discussed at the meetings as well as
the disruptive potential of sightings for national economies and
liberal democratic systems. Also both sources referred to many
issues being discussed in addition to UFO's.
Lorant's testimony confirms some of the
central claims initially made by Source A that were
communicated to this author concerning a secret UN meeting that
would discuss UFOs on February 12 and first released in
an article on February 13. That is
one of the points that is emphasized in the clarification below by
Clay and Shawn Pickering which shows the initial timeline of what
and when they were given information about the UN meeting, and what
they relayed to me and a few other researchers.
A helpful timeline of events and testimonies
concerning the UN meetings is now available. Given that I had met
and been advised by Clay and Shawn on extraterrestrial
related issues over a five year period starting in 2003, and had
been informed of Source A's military background and official work on
the UFO issue almost two years ago, I felt that their disclosure was
both reliable and very important.
Lorant's testimony confirmed the reliability of following pieces of
information disclosed by Source A.
First, that at a secret meeting
discussing UFO's took place on February 12 at UN
Second, that the current wave of
UFO sightings were a major topic of discussion at the
Third, that the stability of
democratic nations as a consequence of increased UFO
sightings was discussed.
Finally, that a range of issues
were discussed in addition to the UFO issue.
Overall, Lorant's independent testimony
supports my initial assessment over the importance of the Pickering
brother's Source A who initially disclosed the meeting had
taken place and that there was a need to inform the public of what
transpired. For first disclosing to the general public the existence
of the UN meeting, the Pickering brothers and Source A
deserve public acknowledgement.
This takes me now to differences in the testimonies between the two
Some suggest that different sets of
meetings occurred whose security classification, content and
personnel contrasted significantly. Other differences point to some
serious limitations in the reliability of Source A. These
limitations point to a possible agenda to first advise the public
about the meetings themselves, but to then obfuscate issues.
While neither of the two sources claim
to have attended the same meetings, it is possible for such a
security difference to occur. It may be that the first meeting, for
example, involved more senior UN officials being given a higher
security level briefing. This could have been relayed to the
meetings on February 13 and 14 in a diluted form during the one and
half hour period described by Lorant.
Another difference is that Gilles Lorant's information basically
refers to UFO sightings, and obliquely refers to extraterrestrial
life as a reality implicitly understood by attendees. The only date
he gives is 2009 as the year when an official policy of "openness"
may begin providing two conditions are met: political/financial
stability and UFO sightings continue.
In contrast, Source A refers to
extraterrestrial life as a central feature of the discussion on
February 12, and that a timetable exists for extraterrestrials
"unambiguously" showing themselves (2013/2017). It is possible that
the February 12 discussed issues concerning official disclosure of
extraterrestrial life as stated by Source A, while the
February 13 and 14 meetings discussed UFO's as a phenomenon that
would be taken more seriously by national governments. If so, this
may help explain the major difference in how Source A and
Lorant described security at the meetings they attended.
A more significant difference is the specific goal of the two sets
According to the clarification relayed
by the Pickering brothers, Source A refers to:
… a logistical "window of
opportunity" to end over 60 years of denial during this "lame
duck" period (of the
Bush Administration) and before
the next administration takes office; this helps to facilitate
disclosure at this time in order to put overt contact at the
forefront of future plans.
This is inconsistent with Lorant's
testimony where he describes a governmental policy of "openness"
that will occur in 2009.
This new policy would take place after
the Presidential election, thereby making the so called lame duck
period moot. Furthermore, the new "openness" policy signals an
abandonment of the 50 year old official debunking policy existing
the 1953 Robertson Panel, and
signals an official approach to the UFO issue that more seriously
considers the available data. This contrasts with "disclosure" which
suggests release of classified information dealing with the reality
of extraterrestrial life or technology.
In essence, Lorant describes a meeting
where agreement was reached whereby a policy of openness would begin
in 2009. This would initiate a process that facilitates disclosure
at a later date. Source A suggests that disclosure could
occur in this "window of opportunity" during the waning months of
the Bush administration.
If two sets of meetings were held, it is unlikely that they would
differ so markedly on such fundamental issues concerning the goals
of 'openness' and 'disclosure' regarding UFOs/extraterrestrial life.
Based on Lorant's greater reliability as a witness, his version of
events appear more credible than Source A. This raises
concern over the extent to which Source A is spinning
information in a way that obfuscates core issues.
The most significant difference that points to a credibility gap
between the two sources is the nature of the information concerning
what was discussed at the meetings. Lorant mentions specific
information that can be confirmed. For example he discusses a Report
prepared by the U.S. Air Force and a branch of the National Guard,
and a role played by three U.S. Senators at the meeting.
He also publicly identified that the
meetings he attended, were chaired by Srgjan Kerim, the
President of the UN General Assembly. Lorant also identified the
Vatican's Apostolic Nuncio and Permanent Observer to the UN,
Archbishop Celestino Migliore; and Sir John Sawers,
Britain's Permanent Representative to the United Nations.
Lorant's information therefore appears
verifiable which, when confirmed, will add greater credibility to
his overall testimony.
In contrast Source A's information, appears in many places to
be unverifiable and indeed purposely contentious. It is almost as
though Source A wants to direct attention to unverifiable
claims that generate heated debate, rather than accurate
descriptions of what transpired at the meetings.
in an earlier article I referred to
significant problems with the descriptive term used by Source A for
extraterrestrials who allegedly would unambiguously show themselves
some time in the future (2017). Source A used the term "The
Controllers". In the clarification below, Source A claims:
"This was just a name, which has
since been changed to "Conformers." It is just another name that
our source grabbed out of the ether to describe an ET group."
I find this statement to be highly
unsatisfactory. Any classified study concerning extraterrestrial
life would have precise descriptive terms for such entities, even if
their appearance and behavior was not fully known. Choosing a
descriptive term such as "Conformers" that is "grabbed out of the
ether" appears to be very disingenuous.
I stand by my earlier view that
descriptive term used for extraterrestrials by Source A had
loaded psychological content. This exists no less for term "the
Conformers," than it did for the earlier term "The Controllers". The
use of such loaded psychological language arouses suspicion
that Source A is choosing descriptive terms for their
psychological conditioning value.
By relaying information that is unverifiable and contentious, and
uses loaded psychological terminology, the obvious conclusion is
that Source A's information is attempting to obfuscate issues that
were actually discussed at the meetings. Given that Source A
originally claimed that he was given authorization to disclose
information concerning the February 12 meeting by an Admiral, the
conclusion to be drawn is that the information relayed by Source
A may be an officially authorized effort to obfuscate genuine
information that is simultaneously leaked to the public.
Alternatively, the obfuscation may be a
protective mechanism used by Source A who may have legitimate
concerns over his physical safety in participating in these
In conclusion, it is important to again acknowledge that Source A
initially disclosed the UN secret UFO meeting on February 12, and a
number of aspects of what was discussed at the meetings have been
corroborated by Lorant, who participated in follow meetings on
February 13 and 14. However, the contentiousness and unverifiability
of significant elements of Source A's testimony, and his use of
psychologically loaded language, leads to justifiable suspicion over
his reliability and motivation.
It appears that Source A has released
some genuine information about the UN meeting and issues discussed
on February 12, but is purposely layering this with obfuscations
that have psychological conditioning purposes. In contrast, Lorant's
testimony appears to be a plausible summation of what he witnessed
at the follow up meetings on February 13 and 14.
Given Lorant's public emergence and
disclosure of specific information that can be confirmed, his
testimony would appear more reliable than Source A. However,
controversy over his precise professional association with the IHEDN
that led to his resignation from FEA on March 6 does create some
uncertainty over his credibility. The controversy may have little
impact on the accuracy of his testimony concerning the UN meeting,
but will discredit him among the mainstream media.
Researchers desiring to investigate the
UN meetings and uncover what was discussed are therefore recommended
to verify the specific claims made by Gilles Lorant while
being mindful over controversy concerning his credentials, and also
treading carefully with information supplied by Source A who
A Statement On The U.N.
UFO Meeting of
February 12th, 2008 By Clay and Shawn Pickering
For clarity's sake concerning our source's revelation
surrounding the recent secret United Nation's UFO meeting, we
want to reiterate that our source met with us on Monday evening
at 8:00PM on February 11th, 2008.
This was the night before the Tuesday morning meeting, which
took place at the UN on February 12th, 2008. My brother and I
were informed by our source that the UN meeting was to take
place at 8:00AM on February 12th.
Our source stated that the UFO issue would be addressed at this
forthcoming meeting. We were told not to release this
information until after the February 12 meeting had taken place.
We were the only source to release information about the
February 12 meeting, on the very day of the meeting. This is the
closest thing to "real time" as one can get.
We released the information of the UN meeting on February 12th
to three sources:
Bob Morningstar, Editor of
Dr. Michael Salla, director
well-known writer, Jim Marrs
Bob Morningstar met with our
source briefly on Monday, February 17th, 2008.
Since Bob lives in the New York City area, it was very
convenient for all parties involved to meet. Bob met with our
source again on February 25th, 2008. Shawn and I set up this
meeting and also attended it. This was a 5-hour long meeting
where our source showed Bob his credentials. Various topics were
discussed among us. Our source had read some of Bob's Internet
writings and showed a keen interest in meeting him. Our source
continues to go through both Shawn and me first, regarding any
new material. This is what our source wants, based on our past
relationship and the trust created.
As for objections to the use of the word "Controllers," our
source simply used this term to describe a certain group of
extraterrestrials that appear to hold sway over other
As I'm sure you're well aware, this name has a lot of baggage
regarding psychological warfare implications. This was just a
name, which has since been changed to "Conformers." It is just
another name that our source grabbed out of the ether to
describe an ET group.
Frankly, our source and those associated with him, have no name
to describe them. Again, this was just a name given to these
extraterrestrials so that we could at least determine some sort
of hierarchy related to this group and other ET's, for example,
There is definitely a movement afoot
to bring the public "up to speed" consciously, regarding
"unambiguous" contact between the world's populace and
extraterrestrials. The point most people are missing is that a
meeting at the UN had occurred regarding the recent UFO flap
My source and his team state that the objectives of the meeting
These sightings were world wide
and not restricted to any particular nation-state. Moreover,
the crafts' technology did not belong to any terrestrial
source. This was to allay any fears (especially, Russia's)
that any secret US aircraft was flying over any other
That our source's team was to
broach the issue that contact would be forthcoming in the
year 2017! And it was noted that things would be heating up
significantly by 2013.
Also, for the sake of clarity: our
source did not "Chair" the meeting. Yes, our source did
participate and offer an opinion as did the others who attended.
The important thing to remember,
according to our source, is that there is a logistical
"window of opportunity" to end over 60 years of denial
during this "lame duck" period (of the Bush Administration)
and before the next administration takes office; this helps to
facilitate disclosure at this time in order to put overt contact
at the forefront of future plans.
We as a people on this planet are at a historic logistical
juncture regarding this phenomenon. The UFO research community
and our source's people are doing, and must do, everything
possible without compromising National Security to help bring
I could go on with much more information. However, my brother
and I think it best to let Bob Morningstar and Dr.
Michael Salla continue reporting our source's information.
Clay & Shawn Pickering New York City
March 6th, 2008