COWF 1995 Cowflop Quarter

What follows are those portions of my letter to the editor of the International UFO Reporter (IUR) which, for one reason or another, the editor did not consider worthy of publication in that august journal. Without debating the merits of Jerome Clark's decision, I believe it only fair to offer the f

This is in reference to the article, "The Air Force report on Roswell : An absence of evidence," by Mark Rodeghier and Mark Chesney, which appeared in the September/October 1994 edition of /UR . The authors accept what CUFOS' Roswell "investigators"

Rodeghier and Chesney say , "Even though Project Mogul documentation exists, there is no paper or physical evidence to prove conclus ively that the purplish-pink tape , for example , was used in constructing the balloon trains." The tape was not used to construct the balloon trains , as Rodeghier an

as Rodeghier and Chesney put it, do not "use all the ava ilabl e evidence ," as they claim. There are numerous other points for wh ich the crashedsaucer promoters pick and choose the ev idence they want the public, Mr. Schiff , and GAO to see . This selective use of information has painted a picture

In December of 1978, the Air Force Freedom of Information Act (FO IA) office in the Pentagon furn ished a batch of records in response to my request subm itted earlier that month. Among the documents was a three-page "Department of the Air Force Air Staff Summary Sheet," dated 20 December 1969, and

Paragraph 4 of the Summary Sheet states: "Moreover, reports of unidentified flying objects 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 ." Paragraph 6 observes that the term_ination of Blue Book would

Military Intelligence Sightings (CIRMIS)," was first publ ished in July of 1948, and was based on a similar publication that first appeared during World War 11. The 1948 edition made no mention of UFOs, and imposed no requirement that UFOs be reported. UFOs were not included in JANAP 146 until Septe

and the reports generated under this publication thereafter were referred to as "CIRVIS reports." Based on Air Force Intelligence records located at the National Archives, and historical reports for the Air Force's Directorate of Intelligence, it seems clear that, once UFO reports were required unde

Directorate of Intelligence, it seems clear that, once UFO reports were required under JANAP 146, a conflict arose between the two reporting systems. The Air Defense Ccommand (AOC) was experiencing difficulty in getting follow-up reports from Air Force Intelligence. These follow-up reports apparentl

going to the UFO investigators at Wright-Patterson AFB , but ADC was left hanging, which made their air defense mission One result of this confusion was that the Air Force published Air Force Regulation (AFR) 200-3, "Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings From Aircraft," on 2 July 1952, in order "[t

According to Office Memo 200-23, "JAN AP ... is wor ldwide instructions for the reporting of incidents observed while airborne which, in the opinion of the pilot, requires prompt defensive and/or investigative action by the Armed Forces." It further states that "Cl AVIS is designed in large measure

200-3 were shifted to AFR 55-88, entitled "Communications Instructions Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings (CI RV IS) From Aircraft." With the May 1966 edition of AFR 55-88, copies of CIRVIS reports were being addressed directly to the Foreign Technology Division (FTD), the successor to the Aeros

From Aircraft." With the May 1966 edition of AFR 55-88, copies of CIRVIS reports were being addressed directly to the Foreign Technology Division (FTD), the successor to the Aerospace Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC), and the home of Project

of UFOs which could affect national security did not go to Blue Book. It merely acknowledged the existence of two separate reporting systems, intended to serve two entirely different purposes. Other documentation clearly shows that procedures were put in place to make sure Blue Book received reports

for it. As a result, pronouncements along these lines lack credibility from the start. Air Force personnel responsible for answering UFO-related queries simply are not knowledgeable enough to distinguish between what was sgrsect to happen when Blue Book ended, and what they 1biII happened. Another p

that he "did most of the work on the sect ion of the book" in question . He also said : By Ro be rt G . T odd

10, 1995 , Kevin Randle , half of the Center for UFO Studies' (CUFOS) Roswell "i nvestigation " team, scrambled to distance himself from Donald Schmitt (the other half of the team) and what Randle claims were Schm itt's numerous lies . Randle also sought to

did , by letter dated December 9, 1992. He explained Friday, September 22, 1995 I went back and re-read page 7 and real ized

and the off icial weather balloon explanation , wh ile the "file " on Roswell contained nothing but a single news paper clipping. The truth was that there was no Blue Book file on either incident , that the nonexistent "fil e" on Circleville did not contain official letters , investigative forms , o

The grossly overblown Roswell incident would have remained buried. in yellowed newspaper clippings without the "testimony" of Ma1or Jesse A. Marcel , the intelligence officer at Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) who took the telephone call from Chaves

radar targets were not in widespread use that the time of the Roswell incident , and , wishful thinking aside , there is no good reason to believe Brazel every recovered one prior to June 14, 1947. Nor is there any good reason to believe Marcel was acquainted with radar targets. Marcel was an intell