In response to the UK File Release, the New York Times appears to have followed the remit of Operation Mockingbird and countered the alleged disclosure trickle with a hit piece article on the content and purpose of the National Archives move.

It created an exchange between some i the exopolitics field starting with this from Come Carpentier.

Dear Friends,

 

Any plans to issue a response to this report which is obviously a misleading "debunking" story meant to put the lid back on the subject by quoting only a few doubtful eye witnesses?

Please circulate in the Exopolitics group.

CCG

David Griffin wrote: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

I think these file releases serve several purposes which is why I've consistently suggested these actions by the UK or other nations be welcomed but not used as an objective 'yardstick' for any significant move to disclose. The first of these can simply be due to a desire to reduce red-tape and workload for the organisation[s] concerned -  after this point a number of issues should be considered.

1. UFOs are the second most sought after data field after porn on the web. Organisations like the MoD know they cannot keep up with the masses of FOIA requests in the net era thus archive release is a simple, pragmatic way of reducing workload.

2. Sightings reports from national defence bodies world-wide work to maintain the prior public consensus that all such information has been and continues to be archived and disseminated by military structures.

3. If defence systems give the impression that simply collating and filing away 'lights in the sky' type sightings and encounters is sufficient, the covert implication is that Joe Public settle for the same.

4. By continuing with the formal position of 'no defence significance' yet allowing national/military bodies to handle file releases which at minimum demonstrate real, tangible phenomena, the wider public are left direction less and confused to the point most give up.

5. File releases can act as a first mechanism for gatekeeping, perception-shaping or mis-direction. As with other areas, the UFO issue is subject to what we could call: 'one dud and out' syndrome as many new to the field are simply looking for the one item that is either factually inaccurate and/or plain silly which in turn will justify writing off the whole field.

I watched British coverage of the file release this time - one very popular TV  satire panel show on the BBC spent 15 minutes on the press and media attention given to the latest release - I felt the way it was handled took us further back "PR" wise. The reports were isolated down to the most 'ludicrous', mentioned without context and it was then no end of little green men lines. But hey ho.

Anyone with a keen memory may be flagging the role of Dr David Clarke from Sheffield university in all this.  Clarke is quick to point out each time the UK MoD release data that he was instrumental in in happening at all, which may be true. However Clarke has always been positioned well to deal with the response to file releases having a ready supply of the usual statements that reduce the whole thing to trivialities once more. Thus we get the usual pseudo-academic fence sitting:

"There are a lot of weird things in the sky, and some of them we can't explain, but there's not a shred of evidence for a single alien visitation."

...which makes you wonder why Dr Clarke bothers to liaise with the UK military at all on this issue. These things do work well for the exopolitical area on a viral level but if the perceived "silly" cases are used by the more influential media to promote the idea that 'there's nothing there after all' then we need to start inoculating against that particular strain.

davID g., UK

----- 

London Journal

British U.F.O. Shocker! Government Officials Were Telling the Truth

The National Archives

Drawings of U.F.O. sightings reported to Britain’s Defense Ministry included a rocket-powered craft and one with colored lights.

LONDON — They were shaped like cigars, saucers, coffins and amorphous blinking blobs. They hovered in a menacing manner, traveled at impossible speeds and vanished into the netherworld, or, in one instance, a hedge in Cornwall.

The National Archives

The reports, released this month, also included a sketch of a vehicle on skis.

The National Archives

In another sketch, the edges of the vehicle were described as “not fuzzy.”

A few carried humanoid life forms, or so it seemed. A few materialized courtesy of the observers’ possibly having had a drink too many, as in the case of an unidentified flying light cluster witnessed loitering in the sky by the patrons of a pub in Kent.

Whatever they were, these phenomena reported to Britain’s Ministry of Defense over the years and made public this month were almost certainly not actual alien aircraft piloted by actual alien beings.

“The government has been telling us the truth,” declared David Clarke, a senior lecturer in journalism at Sheffield Hallam University, who has a side interest in U.F.O.’s. “There are a lot of weird things in the sky, and some of them we can’t explain, but there’s not a shred of evidence for a single alien visitation.”

Which is, frankly, a letdown, as is the government’s prosaic explanation of why, for decades, it has meticulously documented reports of U.F.O. sightings. “We only check the sightings from the perspective of making sure that our military airspace has not been breached, and we pretty much never have airspace breaches,” a Defense Ministry spokeswoman said.

The spokeswoman, who spoke on condition of anonymity — not because she works with Agent Mulder in some shadowy basement office, but because that is government policy — said the ministry had begun making the files public because it had been inundated with U.F.O.-related requests under Britain’s Freedom of Information Act.

The files from 1978 to 2002 were released this month. Some older files have already been declassified and made public; the rest will be released over the next few years. Available on the Web from the National Archives at ufos.nationalarchives.gov.uk, they cover hundreds of sightings but are hardly the X-Files. Much of the material consists of one-page forms carrying details like how big the supposed aircraft was and what, if anything, it seemed to be doing.

A citizen who gives her profession as “meals on wheels operator” describes her shock and awe at the sight of a smallish “Vulcan-shaped object” hovering in the sky. Another witness says she was roused from bed by a brilliant light emanating from a U.F.O. “the size of a milk-bottle base.”

“Some time on a Monday evening during the break in watching ‘Quincy’ — I checked my watch — I noticed an unusual happening in the sky,” one correspondent wrote. And from Cornwall, a report arrived from a 28-year-old motorist who observed a bright yellow light “which bobbed and weaved” over the road, an image recalling Tinkerbell’s mode of travel in “Peter Pan.”

“The light changed to a purplish color, prior to its exit into a thick hedgerow,” the report reads.

The files include random newspaper clippings of questionable journalistic rigor. A 1986 Daily Mirror article reports that the light “from a glowing red object” suffused the cockpit of a Royal Air Force jet carrying Prince Charles, seriously unnerving the pilot. As an aside, the newspaper noted that “Prince Philip has been a keen U.F.O. follower for the past 36 years.”

There are long letters asking big questions. “When is a flying saucer not a flying saucer?” muses one correspondent. “And is the mothership man-made or from a distant planet?”

In the old days, the United States systematically compiled reports of U.F.O. sightings, too. But its last program, known as Project Blue Book, was closed down in 1969 after government officials concluded that if something was out there, it was not anything they wanted to investigate.

Some U.F.O. enthusiasts said last week that they believed the British government had not released all of its files and was concealing the truth about a massive cover-up it had long perpetrated on the British people.

But Joe McGonagle, a self-described U.F.O. researcher here, said the documents showed that far from concealing anything, the government had failed to investigate the sightings properly in the first place.

“A lot of people imagined that there was this vast U.F.O. project with lots of people working on it, when in reality it was a civil servant spending 25 percent of his time on it, filing reports,” he said.

It is not as if the authorities have always failed to take the issue seriously. In 1950, the government convened a secret committee, the Flying Saucer Working Party, to investigate sightings of U.F.O.’s. It concluded that U.F.O.’s were optical illusions, weather phenomena, airplanes seen from strange angles and the like, which has been the government’s line ever since.

In 1979, the House of Lords debated the matter at the urging of the Earl of Clancarty, who believed that man was descended from aliens who crawled from the earth’s core via special tunnels or flew in spaceships 65,000 years ago.

He was not the only noble believer.

“I should like to tell your lords about some of the sightings I have seen,” said the Earl of Halsbury, “beginning at the age of 6, when I saw an angel.”

Lord Gainford said he had seen a U.F.O., which he described as “bright white ball with a touch of red followed by a white cone,” at a New Year’s Eve party in Scotland. Some children saw it, too, he added, and they “had been drinking soft drinks.”

None of their accounts were as detailed as that of a 78-year-old ex-soldier in Aldershot. His story, which he told to a U.F.O. investigator, can be found in the newly released files.

Out fishing in 1983, the man had just poured himself a cup of tea, he recalled, when he was approached by two four-foot-tall beings wearing pale green overalls and large helmets. They led him into what turned out to be their ship — “I thought, Christ — what the hell’s that?” he said — and, apparently considering whether to subject him to extraterrestrial experiments, suddenly announced: “You can go. You are too old and infirm for our purposes.”

“Anxious to avoid causing offense,” the report said, the man asked no questions, even obvious ones like, what planet do you come from? Instead, he returned to the riverbank, where he finished his tea (by then cold) and resumed fishing.

He was reluctant to tell his family, the report says: “I knew my wife would say ‘No more fishing for you, old man.’ ”