History and reasons for UFO ridiculing

The following over 50 year old policy of denial still seems to be quite effective today. It's 2009 christ sake!

On September 11, 1952, Marshall Chadwell, vice-director of the scientific department of the CIA, told the director that a worldwide reporting system had been ordered to intercept unknown flying objects. Flying saucers bear two kinds of danger. The first is the psychological effect upon the masses and the second the vulnerability of the U.S. air space.

For practical reasons ‘we recommend to define a policy about what the populace may be told about these phenomena.’

In the words of Major Kehoe this meant ‘a cunning and ruthless censorship to stamp out public belief in UFOs’. To this end the CIA arranged a meeting of Air Force personnel and scientists at the Pentagon to secretly analyze the material proving the UFOs. This meeting took place on January 14 to 18, 1953, headed by Dr. H.P. Robertson from the University of California, after whom it has been named the ROBERTSON PANEL.

On November 18, 1952, already CIA director Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter had declared in an instruction paper for the President-elect about the subject of UFOs:

“Implications for national security are mainly given by the fact that motive and final intentions of the visitors are still completely unknown. This is compounded by the marked rise of reconnaissance flights by these ships in the time between May and autumn of this year which have led to the concern that something new might be afoot. For these reasons, but also for obviously international and technological reasons and the utmost necessity to prevent panic at all cost, the Majestic-12 commission univocally maintains that severe security measures will also have to be implemented without interruption by the new administration.

“…On the last day the panel adopted a ‘public education program’ supported by all government agencies concerned with two main objectives: Educate and trivialize. The aim of trivialization was to reduce public interest in ‘flying saucers’ and could be accomplished via the mass media like television, movies and articles.

The basis would be actual cases that would first cause confusion, but would then be explained. And as with magic tricks, there is scant interest once the trick has been revealed. The national security council was to start immediately the necessary action to strip the unidentified flying objects of the special status, the aura of the mysterious, they enjoy.

’We have been ordered to collaborate in a country-wide disclaiming campaign,’ Air Force speaker Albert M. Chop said, ‘to publish articles in newspapers and to give interviews to ridicule UFO reports.’

Captain Ruppelt adds:

‘And that was not the worse. We were ordered to keep sightings secret, if at all possible, or, if a story had got out prematurely, to explain it away (weather balloon, meteorite, cloud, forgery… the author) – in any case to do everything possible to remove it. If we could not find a plausible explanation, we were just to ridicule the witnesses.’

During the following months both Chop and Ruppelt resigned from the Air Force.

“The CIA policy of trivializing or ridiculing was only too successful. Just how successful we learn from an open letter by the initiative ‘Justice for Military Personnel’ (J.M.P.) of September 4, 1987 to then President Reagan:

‘The national UFO trivialization campaign ordered by the CIA in 1953 fabricated books and infiltrated the press with hundreds of articles to surround the subject of UFOs with an aura of ridicule through false contacts and obvious UFO swindles. This ongoing campaign had CIA agents infiltrate civil UFO research groups to ridicule them by certain manipulations or to guide their efforts towards ‘other explanations’.

source

Thats been known for some time now, basically they "go with the flow" with the story then they tweek it or spin it to look rediculous. Thats easier and gets better results than trying to deny it.
I admit I loose interest fast when I find out the witness was a known fraud or loony, how easy it is for the Government to make someone that way.

[edit on 9-3-2009 by 38181]

Indeed, and when it comes to the footage that is available everyone assumes its fake. I could shoot a video of a real alien craft landing in the woods with real little green men coming out and you know what people will say? Good CGI...

reply to post by scordar


Kevin Randle had a good article about this subject. If the military wanted to they could of picked a different moniker than UFO, like uniflob. How many people would call up to report a uniflob?

It's just that i find it very annoying (although sometimes even hilarious) that some people still can't even consider the possibility that we are been constantly visited.

I often see the very same people here at ATS trying to explain UFO:s as being swamp gas, chinese lanterns, lens flare and flaming cat fart!

Why is it so hard to accept the FACT that our governments(no matter where you live) have deceived us for decades with this issue and that it must come to an end one way or another.

Originally posted by scordar
It's just that i find it very annoying (although sometimes even hilarious) that some people still can't even consider the possibility that we are been constantly visited.

I often see the very same people here at ATS trying to explain UFO:s as being swamp gas, chinese lanterns, lens flare and flaming cat fart!

Why is it so hard to accept the FACT that our governments(no matter where you live) have deceived us for decades with this issue and that it must come to an end one way or another.

@flaming cat fart

Trust in CNN & Fix News. If they say UFOs are chinese lanterns you bet your ass they are

Anyway not only that but it seems (at least over here in US) that if you believe in UFOs you're a little out of your mind

[edit on 9-3-2009 by DesmoSedici]

I agree fully. And if you think that report is nuts, please follow the link in my sig to the Battle of Los Angeles Thread. That case is from 1942, and the Army not only admitted, but then later verified their classification of the event as a UFO in the Los Angeles Times!

It's a big thread, enjoy! I'd love to hear some feedback there from those of you who are equally outraged by the constant media denial of clearly presented evidence!

-WFA

reply to post by scordar


I hear you, loud and clear. As a matter of fact, I too was skeptic, until I encountered one on the highway in West Texas that made me sick as all hell for several months, and gave me little crystals on my kidneys and liver. I lost over 6 hours that night, and to this day cannot remember exactly what happened. I will say one thing though, it was not swamp gas, of the planet Venus, or a flock of geese, and it wasn't an aircraft either. It looked like the Sun set down on the road, and it gave me my very fist sunburn ever. Since that time I have seen several other ET craft in the air, and one that landed on the ground in northern Indiana, and three of us watched it for 30 minutes or so. Just read Sleeper's thread here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Or, better yet, read his book: A Day With An Extraterrestrial by Lou Baldin
www.lulu.com...

Just don't believe the non believers, that's all!

reply to post by scordar


Good post-interesting stuff.
Its also revealing that the two individuals mentioned in the post have also made some intruiging comments about UFOs:

"I've been convinced for a long time that the flying saucers are real and interplanetary. Another words we are being watched by beings from outer space."
Albert M. Chop, deputy public relations director, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,(NASA) and former United States Air Force spokesman for Project Blue Book.

"It is time for the truth to be brought out in open Congressional hearings. Behind the scenes high ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about the UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense."
Admiral Hillenkoetter-the first Director of the CIA, 1947-50.
February 27, 1960.

reply to post by scordar


It is because it is 2009 that your post is unnecessary. It doesn't matter today and probably never that "The following over 50 year old policy of denial still seems to be quite effective today. It's 2009 christ sake!" is still effective. It is 2009 and people are seeing unexplainable aerial phenomena and many are videotaping it many more than when emulsion film still and movie cameras were used. People didn't walk around with as many cameras then as now. I don't think that the policy you quoted ever had any effect on anyone having a sighting. I don't think that the majority of the public had any concept of such a policy. It didn't affect us, overall, then and it doesn't now. You're giving too much power to something that is not affected.