Page last updated: January 29, 2015 4:35 PM

* * *

IN 1981



skip to reduced extract of released 1981 information

Frontiers of Science* was a science oriented magazine through which CUFOS was temporarily publishing materials in 1981. I received it directly from CUFOS sometime at the beginning of 1982. CUFOS was helping disseminate this newly discovered FOIA material to at least a small portion of the general public. Also contributing an article to same was Richard Hall, former director of NICAP who had edited the important "UFO Proof" document NICAP submitted to all members of congress in the early 1960's, entitled "The UFO Evidence."

This next 4 page article was published in Frontiers of Science (May/June 1981) , and was written by Peter Gersten, attorney for G.S.W. (Ground Saucer Watch) and CAUS (Citizens against UFO Secrecy.) As previously mentioned, these were two groups who, used the "Freedom of Information Act" to sue the government for additional information to what you just read. By 1981, Mr. Gersten and those groups were able to obtain an additional 2,100 documents from various agencies. He presents a detailed accounting of what was released.

+ + +

What the U.S. Government Knows About Unidentified Flying Objects

By Peter Gersten

At last! New evidence for the existence of unconventional aerial objects relies no longer on the credibility of civilian reports but on the records of scientists, military personnel, intelligence analysis, law enforcement officers and other reliable and responsible people. Their testimony can be found in three thousand pages of previously classified documents on UFOs released [mostly through Freedom of Information Act suits] over the past few years by the Departments of State/Army/Navy/Air Force/Defense/the Federal Bureau of Investigation/the National Security Agency/the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency.

This overwhelming evidence indicates that Unidentified Flying Objects do exist, and that some of them are unconventional craft that [1] pose a threat to national security and [2] perform beyond the range of present-day technological development.

Furthermore, there is evidence that our government has continually misinformed the public concerning the true significance of the "UFO problem."

National Security and UFOs

"It is my view that this situation has possible
implications for our national security."
- Central Intelligence Agency, 1952

In late 1952, a memorandum was drafted for CIA Director Walter B. Smith's signature, to be sent to the Executive Secretary of the National Security Council. The memo's subject: "Unidentified Flying Objects." The document shows that the CIA had "reviewed the current situation concerning unidentified flying objects which have caused extensive speculation in the press and has been the subject of concern to government organizations."

It was the Director's opinion, based upon the review, that "this situation has possible implications for our national security which transcend the interests of a single service."

"I therefore recommend that this Agency and the agencies of the Department of Defense be directed to formulate and carry out a program of intelligence and research activities required to solve the problem of instant positive identification of unidentified flying objects."

A draft of a proposed National Security Council directive was attached to the memorandum.

Unfortunately, it appears that the NSC directive fell by the wayside. Now, twenty-nine years later, the "current situation," contrary to official denials, still poses serious implications for our national security. (J.C. Remember, this article was written in 1981. jc added 1/17/2009: More information has been released since this time, in addition to what you're about to read.)

UFOs as a Threat

The Government's position:

"No UFO reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force
has ever given any indication of a threat to our national security."

Air Force, 1980

The evidence:

DOD, USAF, and CIA document reveal that during October, November, and December of 1975, reliable military personnel repeatedly sighted unconventional aerial objects in the vicinity of nuclear-weapons storage areas, aircraft alert areas and nuclear-missile control facilities at Loring Air Force Base, Maine; Wurtsmith AFB Michigan; Malstrom AFB, Montana; Minot AFB, North Dakota; and Canadian Air Forces Station, Ontario. 1 Many of the sightings were confirmed by radar. At Loring AFB, the interloper "demonstrated a clear intent on the weapons storage areas."

The incidents drew the attention of the CIA, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of Defense. Though the Air Force informed the public and the press that individual sightings were isolated incidents, an Air Force document says that "Security Option III was implemented and that security measures were coordinated with fifteen (15) Air Force bases from Guam to Newfoundland. 2 Another AF document reveals that the Air Force conducted an investigation into the incidents but found no explanation for their occurrence.

It appears Air Force "security measures" provided no protection against the "invasion." One month later, on January 21, 1976, UFOs "25 yards in diameter, gold or silver in color with blue light on top, hole in middle, and red light on bottom" were observed "near the flight line of Cannon AFB, N.M." Ten days later, on January 31, a UFO was observed "over the ammo storage area" at Fort Richie, Maryland. 3

The above accounts have numerous historical precedents. From 1948 through 1950, an FBI document reveals, UFOs were sighted by "persons whose reliability is not questioned, "near highly sensitive military and government installations, including nuclear weapons design, construction, testing and stockpiling sites. Security officials were greatly alarmed by these incidents." 4

A CIA document reveals that in 1952 "sighting of unexplained objects at great altitudes and traveling at high speeds" were reported in the vicinity of major U.S. defense installations and posed a threat to national security.

The evidence is clear and convincing that the Federal government has systematically misinformed the American people about the real threat to our national security posed by such UFO encounters.

UFO As Advanced Technology

The Government's position:

"There has been no evidence submitted to
or discovered by the Air Force
that sightings categorized as 'unidentified' represent
technological developments or principles beyond the range
of present-day scientific knowledge."

Air Force, 1980

The official documents reveal hundreds of sighting reports - many confirmed by radar and other tracking devices - that describe unconventional objects exhibiting advanced performance characteristics involving maneuverability, speed, size and shape.

A Defense Intelligence Agency document reveal that on September 19, 1976, American-made Iranian jets encountered several UFOs that exhibited a technology beyond present-day development. During the night-time encounter, one F-4 jet, upon approaching one of the UFOs, lost all instrumentation and communications functions. Another F-4's weapons-control panel became inoperable when the pilot attempted to fire at the object. ( Please see Parviz Jafari testimony at this link)

The DIA evaluation (October 12, 1976) refers to this incident as "an outstanding report" because the objects were seen by many witnesses of high credibility; the visual sightings had radar confirmation; similar electromagnetic effects were reported by three separate aircraft; and physiological effects were reported by some of the crew members. Furthermore, the UFOs displayed an "inordinate amount of maneuverability."

A State Department message (March 7, 1975) for the American Embassy in Algiers tells of "strange machines" seen near Algerian military installations by "respectable people." Some of the sightings were confirmed by radar.

And another State Department message from our embassy in Kuwait reports that during November 1978, a series of UFO sightings caused the Kuwaiti government to appoint an investigatory committee from the Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research. One UFO appearing over the northern oil fields "seemingly did strange things" to the automatic pumping equipment. The equipment is designed to shut itself down when any failure occurs that could seriously damage the petroleum-gathering and transmission system; when such an event occurs, the pumping equipment must be restarted manually. When the UFO appeared, the pumping system automatically shut down. But when the UFO "vanished," the system started up again, _automatically._

The presence of a highly sophisticated technology - a technology beyond our present development - seems obvious. Why is it being ignored by our government?

A Question of Survival

"It would seem a little more of this survival attitude is
called for in dealing with the UFO problem."

National Security Agency, 1968

The evidence indicates that some unconventional aerial objects could provoke, either intentionally or unintentionally, an international incident - with serious repercussions.

In March 1967, an intercept technician with the USAF Security Service intercepted a communication between the pilot of a Russian-made Cuban MIG-21 and his command concerning a UFO encounter. 5 The technician has since stated that when the pilot attempted to fire at the object, the MIG and its pilot were destroyed by the UFO. Furthermore, the technician alleges that all reports, tapes, log entries, and notes on the incident were forwarded to the National Security Agency at their request.

Not surprisingly, several months later, the agency drafted a report entitled UFO Hypothesis and Survival Question. Released in October 1979 under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, the report states that "the leisurely scientific approach has too often taken precedence in dealing with the UFO question." The Agency concluded that no matter what UFO hypothesis is considered, "all of them have serious survival implications."

Comparing the UFO problem to a rattler on a forest path, the NSA report says, "you would have to treat the alarm as if it were a real and immediate threat to your survival. Investigation would become an intensive emergency action to isolate the threat and to determine its precise nature. It would be geared to developing adequate defense measures in a minimum amount of time. It would seem a little more of this survival attitude is called for in dealing with the UFO problem."

The Government and UFOs

"Further scientific investigation of UFOs is unwarranted." -
Air Force, 1980

Perhaps most disturbing is the very fact that after thirty-two years, a small but significant percentage of UFOs still remains unidentified. While the government has been concerned with the psychological danger the UFO phenomenon poses, it has been unwilling to consider the prospect that some UFOs pose an actual physical threat. Fearful of generating undue concern, the government has deliberately chosen to debunk UFO reports and has misinformed the public as to the true importance of the phenomenon.

Unconventional aerial objects that boast unlimited and unrestricted access to our most sensitive nuclear installations -- and which can render inoperable the instrumentation, communication/weapon systems of American-made jets, or which can shut down and restart at will sophisticated hydraulic equipment -- do warrant further scientific study, awareness of an advanced technology and potential threat is not an unreasonable pursuit. As the National Security Agency indicates, it could be a matter of survival.

Though admittedly the government has studied UFO reports, apparently no government body has dwelt on those official government reports that indicate certain UFOs pose a threat to national security. Is there any doubt that it is these reports which deserve further scientific investigation? (J.C. I suspect this last statement could be incorrect. Although we have not seen them, I personally believe that "some" body of our department of defense is watching this very closely.)

The now-defunct USAF twenty-year "Project Blue Book" UFO study never had a chance to receive the "outstanding report" from Iran. An Air Force document states: "Reports of UFOs which could affect national security are made in accordance with JANAP 146* or Air Force Manual 55-11, and are not part of the Blue Book system." The Air Force's UFO investigation was criticized as long ago as 1952 by the CIA. The CIA complained that the Air Force's case-by-case investigations and explanations were insufficient to determine the exact nature of the phenomenon. 6

Similarly, the Air Force-sponsored "Condon Committee" study by the University of Colorado in 1968 never earnestly intended to investigate the physical reality of the phenomenon. Indeed an early memorandum by one of Dr. Edward U. Condon's staff indicates otherwise: "The trick would be, I think, to describe the project so that to the public, it would appear a totally objective study . . . one way to do this would be to stress investigation, not of the physical phenomenon, but rather of the people who are doing the observing . . ." 7


In June 1978, a French government UFO study group (GEPAN) concluded that "everything taken into consideration, a material phenomenon seems to be behind the totality of the phenomenon - a flying machine whose modes of sustenance and propulsion are beyond our knowledge."

If the UFO phenomenon is indeed beyond the grasp of our understanding - technologically speaking - all the more reason to strive towards learning more about it. For although the United States may ignore the significance of the UFO phenomenon, it is hardly reasonable to suppose that the rest of the world will do so.

And there are other considerations besides national security in following up the UFO enigma. As a report from the National Security Agency in 1968 put it.

"Perhaps the UFO question might even make man undertake studies which could enable him to construct a society which is most conducive to developing a completely human being, healthy in all aspects of mind and body - and most importantly, able to recognize and adapt to real environmental situations."

In isolating ourselves from the UFO phenomenon we may risk missing what could be the most important adventure man has yet embarked upon.

FOOTNOTES (to complete 1981 Frontiers of Science article):

1. NORAD Classified Message: to Secretary of Air Force, et al: from NORAD Director of Operations; subject: Suspicious Unknown Air Activity; November 11, 1975. [Still classified CONFIDENTIAL; leaked to UFO research group in late 1976.

2. Air Force Security Police [AFSP] message to 15 Air Force Bases, November 10, 1975

3. This and the previous statements are found in the following documents:
  • Memorandum for Record; for the Joint Staff; signed by J.B. Morin, Rear Admiral, USN & Deputy Director for Operations, NMCC: January 21, 1976

  • Memorandum for Record; for the Joint Staff; from Fred A. Treyz, Brigadier General, USAF & Deputy Director for Operations, NMCC: subject: Unidentified Flying Object Sighting: January 31, 1976

  • Memorandum for Record; for the Joint Staff; from L.J. LeBlanc Jr., Brigadier General, USMC & Deputy Director for Operations, NMCC subject: Report of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs); July 30, 1976
4. "Rees Letter": AFOSI (Air Force Office of Special Investigations), 17th District, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico; letter to director of AFOSI; May 25, 1950

5. "Cuban Incident": Air Force Security Service 6947th Squadron technician's statement to Stanton T. Friedman; October 27, 1977

6. Memorandum for Director of Central Intelligence; subject: Flying Saucers; by E. Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director, Scientific Intelligence; September 24, 1952

7. Memo: to E. James Archer and Thurston E. Hanning; from Robert J. Low: subject: "Some Thoughts on the UFO Project": August 9, 1966

Return to beginning of Main Article (1981 Releases)

+ + +

Reduced extract of the 1981 releases

  1. By 1981, GSW and the Washington Post had gotten some 3,000 documents released total

  2. From: Dept. of State, Army / Navy / Air Force / Defense / FBI / National Security Agency / DIA & the CIA [¶ 1]

  3. These documents say:

    a) UFOs exist
    b) Some of them are unconventional craft that
    c) pose a threat to national security [¶ 2]

  4. Reiterates 1975 nuclear missile base sightings [UFOs as a Threat: The Evidence]

  5. Security Option III was implemented and that measures were coordinated with 15 AF bases from Guam to New Foundland. Unsuccessful attempt to apprehend the intruders. [Ibid: and see .. Belgium military verified sightings]

  6. January 26, 1976: UFO sighted, 25 yards in diameter, gold or silver in color, with blue light on top, halo in middle and red light on bottom, observed near flight line of Cannon AFB, New Mexico [UFOs as a Threat: ¶ 3]

    10 days later: UFO observed near a radar site at Elgin AFB, Florida [Ibid]

    July 30, 1976: UFO observed over ammo storage area at Fort Richie, Maryland [Ibid]

  7. Same type reports occurred from 1948-1950. [Ibid: ¶ 4], appendix 106]

  8. Reiterates Iranian F-4 encounter w/UFO on 9/19/76. [UFOs as Advanced Technology: ¶ 2/3]]

  9. DIA report says this (Iranian) report was outstanding because: [Ibid: ¶ 3 ]
    a) objects were seen by many witnesses of high credibility
    b) visual sightings had radar confirmation
    c) similar electromagnetic effects were reported by 3 separate aircraft
    d) physiological effects were reported by some crew members
    e) UFOs displayed an "inordinate amount of maneuverability"

  10. March 7, 1975: American embassy UFO report from Algiers "strange machines seen by respectable people near Algerian military installations" [Ibid: ¶ 4]

  11. November 1978: Kuwait oil pumping station shut down when UFO appeared and restarted automatically when UFO left. However, the system is safety designed so that when it shuts down, it must be restarted manually. [ Ibid: ¶ 5: also see "Vietnam UFO Incident"]

  12. March 1967: Intercept technician with the US Air Force Security Service intercepted a communication between the pilot of a Russian-made Cuban MIG-21 and his command concerning a UFO encounter in progress. When the pilot attempted to fire at the object, the MIG and its pilot were destroyed by the UFO. The technician also said: All reports, tapes, log entries and notes on the "incident" were forwarded to the National Security Administration at their request. [A Question of Survival: ¶ 2]

[also see: "Moody" case.8/13/75.]


In the early 1980's, CUFOS had some problems and Dr. Hynek and associates were searching for a way to save money and yet get the information their group was publishing to a larger portion of the general public.

In Jan. 1980, in an attempt to achieve this, a second issue of the Jan. 1980 CUFOS journal featured an editorial by Dr. Hynek on its cover explaining that IUR was going to publish its journal through a new science magazine called PROBE, rather than being subscribed to directly.

Unfortunately, that attempt failed. I have a lapse of two years in my issues of IUR at this time. But I believe the journal started up again sometime around Jan. 1982. That issue featured another editorial by Dr. Hynek explaining that PROBE had folded after a few issues and that they tried again with another independent publisher entitled SECOND LOOK which almost immediately changed its name to FRONTIERS OF SCIENCE. This effort also failed.

However, received with the first new issue of a newly reinstituted IUR in Jan. 1982, was a copy of an article by Peter Gersten, which he wrote for FRONTIERS OF SCIENCE which detailed information which validated the existence of UFOs, released by nine (9) different branches of the government in 1981. An article by Richard Hall (former assistant director of NICAP and editor of "The NICAP Evidence") in support of and adding additional information to Mr. Gersten's article was incorporated therein.

CUFOS, unfortunately, could only help them disseminate this (then) newly discovered amazing material to its own journal readers; a much smaller population than was desired by all. However, CUFOS has continued to publish its journal on a regular schedule since that time thanks to the efforts of Jerome and Nancy Clark, Mark Rodeghier and IUR's contributing editorial staff and artists. Its excellent analyses and discussions concerning both up-to-date and past reported events continues to be of hallmark quality.

Return to beginning of article



1978 Govt. Releases
Dr. J. Allen Hynek and the FOIA Releases

"Author's Select Cases"
Questions and Answers

Page from the website of:

Website Master Index