1997 - Cover Up Press Release R.Conway & M.Williams

Magazine Overview

This document is a press release from BUFORA (British UFO Research Association) dated June 26, 1997. It focuses on profiling individuals involved in researching government cover-ups related to UFO phenomena, particularly within the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD).

Profiles of UFO Researchers

Nick Redfern Nick Redfern is a UK-based investigator and author, described as an authoritative figure on the UFO subject. He has investigated the case details and found documents at the public records office. Redfern claims his upcoming book, "UFOs a Covert Agenda," will prove rumors about covert MOD departments investigating UFO reports. He will be a speaker at the BUFORA conference in August, discussing these revelations and presenting evidence of a government cover-up. He can be contacted through Matthew Williams or Richard Conway.

Dr. Colin Ridyard Dr. Colin Ridyard, holding a Ph.D., M.R.S.C., and C. Chem, has been interested in UFOs since a wave of sightings on Anglesey. He initiated a petition to parliament, which was met with a MOD statement that they would not investigate further. Dr. Ridyard has worked with Rt Hon Ieuan Wyn Jones MP to search for the missing government UFO file AIR 2/16918 and drafted parliamentary questions that led to the file's retrieval. He is a member of the Royal Society of Chemists.

Matthew Williams Matthew Williams is a former civil servant from HM Customs & Excise Criminal Investigations. He now investigates the UFO enigma full-time after his own UFO sighting. He claims to have compelled the MOD to admit knowledge of the missing UFO files while providing misleading information to the public. Williams has investigated government UFO investigations and uncovered details of a super-secret facility in Corsham, Wilts, housed underground. He identifies as a whistleblower and has participated in actions against bases. He will speak at the BUFORA UFO Congress about UFO cover-ups and provide proof of Provost & Security services investigating UFOs, contrary to MOD denials, and evidence of underground tunnels used by the MOD.

Richard Conway Richard Conway is an undergraduate at the University of Sussex studying economics and Spanish. He has been investigating UFO phenomena for three years, with a focus on the Bentwaters UFO incident in December 1980, where a UFO reportedly disarmed nuclear missiles with a light beam. He has been involved in collecting government UFO files and is interested in the government's reluctance to admit its interest in UFOs and its subsequent denials. Conway believes the government views UFOs as a national threat. He is currently organizing the 1997 BUFORA international congress.

Chris Fowler Chris Fowler of Cardiff is a researcher who writes to MPs and the Ministry of Defence for clarification on UFO sightings and policy. He has obtained confirmation of some sightings and, in November 1995, secured an admission that the Provost & Security Service (RAF Special Police & Intelligence unit) was a coordination point for UFO reports. He learned from File AIR 2/16918 that this service was part of a secret UFO investigation unit, contradicting previous MOD statements. Timothy Good praised his work. Chris is available for contact.

Introduction to UFO Press Release

This section explains the purpose of the press release: to help the reader understand the basic concepts of UFO cover-up research and the significance of the MOD's denial of UFOs as a defense matter. It highlights that while the MOD claims only one department (Airstaff 2) investigates UFOs, file AIR 2/16918 shows six MOD departments were involved in the 1960s. The release notes that due to 30-year secrecy rules, current records are inaccessible, but historical records for some intelligence departments involved in UFO investigation are missing, which is deemed suspicious.

Confirmed MOD UFO Investigation Departments (1960s)

The press release lists the following confirmed departments involved in UFO investigation in the 1960s:

• AMOC (Air Ministries Operations Centre)
• AIS (Air Information Service)
• AI(Tech)4a (Air Intelligence Technical 4a)
• AI(Tech)5b (Air Intelligence Technical 5b)
• All (Air Intelligence 1)
• DSTI (Department of Scientific and Technical Intelligence)
• DDI-Tech (Department of Defence Intelligence Technical)

Public-facing departments that fronted these operations included DS8, Air Staff 2, and S6.

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has also investigated UFO phenomena, including a recent near miss incident involving a UFO and an aircraft landing at Manchester airport. Rumored investigating departments include DI55 and DI64.

Specific Documents and Notes

Page 1 (Project Bluebook) Project Bluebook was a USAF public project to investigate UFOs. Its leader, Dr. J. Allen Hynek, reportedly left in disgust, believing that unexplained records were withheld. He later stated that the project's conclusions, which attributed most sightings to mundane causes, were a cover-up. Secret investigations were occurring behind Project Bluebook.

Page 2 (MOD Response to Project Bluebook) The MOD responded to Project Bluebook, stating that investigations were part of the MOD's Air Force Technical Intelligence Department. Publicly, the MOD stated only one or two civil servant-grade employees investigated UFOs. The press release suggests this public stance, attributed to Nick Pope, may be due to his continued involvement with the MOD or his participation in a cover-up. The MOD admits to a policy of playing down UFOs to avoid public or political pressure for large-scale investigations.

Page 3 (Provost and Security Service) Nick Pope denied knowledge of Provost and Security Service and RAF Rudloe Manor's involvement in UFO investigations. However, a file letter indicates that Provost & Security Service investigated UFOs, with files classified as CONFIDENTIAL. The MOD has denied sending officers to interview witnesses, but this file suggests otherwise, potentially explaining "Men In Black" or "Men from the Ministry" visitations. The witness Ann Henson was reportedly advised by the MOD not to discuss her sighting or the MOD investigation, a silence she maintained for 30 years.

Page 4 (Secret UFO Investigation Unit) Despite MOD statements that no UFO reports were classified secret, an Intelligence report from a secret UFO investigation unit uses the word "SECRET." The report describes an object moving at speeds exceeding 1400 Mph, with no explanation found. Experienced radar officers estimated the contacts were not conventional aircraft. The MOD was reportedly unhappy about UFO reports reaching the press and intended to play down the subject, using disinformation, which the authors consider proof of a cover-up.

Page 5 (Withheld Files and US Release) Statements from serving and former officers indicate that many files have never been released to the public. Lord Peter Hill Norton believes there is a cover-up and that UFOs are of defense significance, with films and evidence being withheld by the MOD. A 1967 MOD ruling mandated UFO reports be preserved in the Public Records Office, but the authors question the whereabouts of files from secret MOD departments. Documents not released in the UK have been provided to the US government and released to US citizens under the American Freedom of Information Act, bypassing UK secrecy laws. Some of these documents reveal UFO incidents involving American airbases that interfered with nuclear weapons.

Page 6 (UK Freedom of Information Act) The proposals for a UK Freedom of Information Act are noted, with the observation that the MOD would not be obligated to participate. The authors advocate for a comprehensive government and military-wide Freedom of Information Act.

Page 7 (CAA Reports) Details of Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) reports on UFOs are mentioned, with case files expected to be released ahead of military records. Pilot witnesses have reported objects ranging from lights to oval and cigar-shaped objects.

Page 8 (DDI Tech Report) A DDI Tech report describes an object ascending from 50,000 to 70,000 feet, a ceiling unachievable by contemporary aircraft. The objects were described as large as ships and capable of sharp turns. It was concluded that these were not equipment faults or misidentifications but unknown and unconventional aircraft.

Page 9 (RAF Rudloe Manor Involvement) A letter from Airstaff 2a to Chris Fowler admits that RAF Rudloe Manor, housing the Provost and Security Services Unit, was involved in collecting UFO reports sent to MOD London for investigation. This contradicts earlier statements and confirms Provost & Security Services' involvement in 1962.

Page 10-12 (File AIR 2/16918 and Missing File) Statements from the PRO indicate they do not know the whereabouts of file AIR 2/16918, which details secret UFO departments. They promise a thorough search. Subsequent pages detail the discovery of the file, initially misfiled, and the MOD's attempts to explain away discrepancies. Kerry Philpott's statement is met with doubt due to the perceived level of cover-up.

US Air Force Letter (June 15, 1965)

A letter from the Department of the Air Force in Washington to Mr. Langton of the Ministry of Defence inquires about British UFO activity. It asks if the UK has a government program comparable to Project Blue Book, a scientific consultant, dedicated civilian organizations, and the extent of UFO activity. It mentions that Dr. J. Allen Hynek, the scientific consultant to Project Blue Book, plans to visit London in September and wishes to discuss the subject.

Ministry of Defence Response (June 24, 1965)

Lieutenant Colonel John F. Spaulding of the Ministry of Defence responds to the US Air Force letter. He confirms that the Air Force Department has the primary responsibility for investigating UFO reports in the UK, with reasons similar to the US. They investigate every case and use assistance from various sources, including Kodak Ltd., for analyzing photos and films. However, they do not maintain a special scientific staff, with investigations handled as part of the routine work of the Air Force Technical Intelligence department. Unlike the US, they investigate single-observer sightings. Their results align with the US: about 90% of cases are positively identified, 10% lack sufficient data, and no evidence of extraterrestrial origin has been found. The MOD's policy is to play down UFOs to avoid political pressure. The specific answers to the US questions are: a. No (comparable government program), b. No (scientific consultant), c. Yes (a considerable number of civilian organizations), and d. They investigate about 70 cases a year, with others unreported. They express willingness to discuss the matter with Dr. Hynek.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this press release is the alleged government cover-up of UFO phenomena in the UK. The document strongly implies that the MOD has been secretive, misleading, and has actively worked to downplay the significance of UFO sightings. The researchers profiled are presented as diligent individuals uncovering evidence of this cover-up through document requests, analysis of official files, and interviews. The editorial stance is critical of government secrecy and supportive of transparency and public access to information, advocating for a Freedom of Information Act. The document aims to expose what it perceives as a deliberate effort by the authorities to conceal the true nature and extent of UFO investigations and evidence.

This document is a collection of declassified Royal Air Force (RAF) Police investigation files and related correspondence concerning Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), also commonly referred to as UFOs. The material spans several decades, from the 1950s through the 1990s, and includes official reports, witness testimonies, radar data, and administrative communications.

Investigation Files and Reports

Early Investigations (1950s)

Documents from the 1950s detail the procedures for reporting and investigating aerial phenomena. A 1956 memorandum from HQ. Southern Sector outlines instructions for reporting unusual radar responses, emphasizing the need for detailed assessments of appearance, signal strength, range, bearing, and ground speed. It also stresses the importance of public credibility and the need to classify information as 'CONFIDENTIAL'.

Witness Accounts and Radar Sightings (1960s-1980s)

A significant portion of the material pertains to specific sightings. A 1962 investigation report details an encounter by Miss A. Heybon, a 16-year-old witness, who described a star-like object with red and green flames. She observed the object over several nights, noting its diminishing size, lack of flashing, and the presence of a second, smaller object. The report also includes a diagram compiled by I. A. HESON.

Radar sightings are also extensively documented. A report from April 1957 details radar operators at West Freugh detecting unidentified objects on their screens. These objects were tracked at high altitudes (50,000 to 70,000 ft) and exhibited unusual behavior, including rapid acceleration and sharp turns. The report concludes that the objects were likely of unidentified type and origin, unlikely to be conventional aircraft, meteorological balloons, or charged clouds.

Further radar data from the 1970s and 1980s lists various incidents, including unidentified bright lights, UFOs observed near aircraft with no corresponding air traffic control reports, and large, translucent objects with unusual shapes detected at high altitudes.

Ministry of Defence (MOD) Correspondence (1990s)

Later correspondence, particularly from the 1990s, reflects the MOD's official stance. A letter from Miss K. Philpott of the Ministry of Defence Secretariat (Air Staff) to Mr. C. Fowler clarifies that the MOD's interest in UAP reports is primarily to determine if there is any evidence of defense concern. The MOD states it is not aware of evidence substantiating extraterrestrial craft and that such matters are considered a 'non-issue' unless they pose a defense threat. The letter also addresses specific points, including abductions (deemed a civil police matter) and the role of RAF Rudloe Manor, confirming it serves as a focal point for flying complaints but does not conduct UAP research.

Public Record Office Involvement

Correspondence from the Public Record Office (PRO) indicates issues with document management. A letter from Sarah Tyacke in March 1997 addresses a query about document AIR 2/16918. The PRO confirms the document was available for public inspection but was subsequently misplaced in April 1996. Despite extensive searches, it remains unlocated, and the PRO acknowledges the challenges of managing millions of documents and the occasional occurrence of human error.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The overarching theme is the official investigation and documentation of unexplained aerial phenomena by the British government, primarily the RAF and Ministry of Defence. The documents reveal a systematic approach to collecting and analyzing reports, with a clear distinction made between official findings and public speculation. The editorial stance, as conveyed through the official communications, is one of cautious inquiry, focusing on potential defense implications rather than validating extraterrestrial hypotheses. The presence of radar data alongside witness accounts highlights the multi-faceted nature of these investigations. The inclusion of PRO correspondence underscores the challenges in accessing and preserving historical records related to such sensitive topics.

This document collection, dated March to June 1997, primarily consists of correspondence and parliamentary records concerning the handling and accessibility of Ministry of Defence (MOD) files related to Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), with a specific focus on document AIR 2/16918.

Parliamentary Question and Initial Correspondence

The issue begins with a parliamentary question posed by MR IEUAN WYN JONES to the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, on March 21, 1997. The question sought a statement on public access to Public Record Office document AIR 2/16918. MR GARY STREETER provided an answer stating that the matter was assigned to the Public Record Office under its framework document and that the Chief Executive had been asked to write to the honourable Member.

Subsequent correspondence from the Public Record Office (PRO) dated March 26, 1997, addressed to Dr Colin Ridyard, confirms that AIR 2/16918 had been located after being misplaced in another box. The PRO staff, including Clive Hawkins and Vivienne Bales, were available to assist with ordering the document. DR ELIZABETH HALLAM SMITH, Director of Public Services at the PRO, signed this letter.

Further correspondence from I D Goode, Deputy Departmental Record Officer at the Ministry of Defence, dated April 1997, addressed to Mr Matthew Williams, confirmed that AIR 2/16918 was in MOD's hands and returned to the PRO on November 9, 1996. Goode explained that the file was originally released in a sanitized form in 1994, with pages containing sensitive information marked. Following a change in policy in 1995, related to the Open Government initiative, previously excluded information was released, and extracts were transferred to the PRO on November 22, 1995. Goode clarified that departments can remove sensitive papers before files are opened, but not after. He regretted being unable to provide further information on what happened to the file after its arrival at the MOD.

Document Retrieval and System Issues

On May 16, 1997, DR ELIZABETH HALLAM SMITH of the PRO wrote to Mr Richard Conway regarding document AIR 2/16918. This letter detailed the PRO's Records Information System (RIS) for tracking documents. It highlighted limitations of the system, such as the final recording of a document's return to store being at the entry point rather than its shelf location, and occasional scanning failures. These issues, combined with human error and a high volume of document retrieval (over 2000 per day), led to documents being misplaced. Specifically, AIR 2/16918 was 'missing' through three further requests. The letter confirmed that the document did not leave the Kew building. It was last recorded on RIS as being produced on March 26, 1996, and recovered from an incorrect location on March 25, 1997.

A follow-up document from the PRO, also dated May 16, 1997, and addressed to Mr Conway, provided a chronological sequence of events for AIR 2/16918. It was requisitioned by PRO Photo Estimates Department on March 26, 1996, and expected back in April 1996. It was then requisitioned by PRO Government Services Department on May 8, 1996, and again by PRO Estimates Department on May 14, 1996, both times being 'frustrated' (unavailable). On February 17, 1997, it was ordered by a reader and again 'frustrated', leading to a systematic search. Finally, on March 25, 1997, the document was found misfiled in a wrong box within the same class. The search procedure involves examining up to 20,000 documents, taking considerable time. The document was found inside another document of the same class that had not been used recently, deviating from the usual pattern of misfiling. The PRO apologized for the document's unavailability.

MOD Policy on UFO Files and FOI Legislation

On June 11, 1997, Miss K Philpott, Secretariat (Air Staff) at the Ministry of Defence, responded to Dr Ridyard's letter of May 7, addressed to the Prime Minister, regarding "unidentified flying objects". Philpott confirmed that MOD files are subject to the Public Records Act of 1958 and 1967, which generally keeps files closed for 30 years. She explained that before 1967, most "UFO" files were destroyed after five years due to lack of public interest. However, since 1967, with increased public interest, UFO report files are routinely preserved. A list of available UFO files from the 1950s and early 1960s held at the PRO was provided, including AIR 2/16918.

Philpott also mentioned that the Cabinet Office is responsible for advancing the Government's pledge to introduce a Freedom of Information Act, with a White Paper expected before the Summer Recess, followed by consultation.

Follow-up Correspondence and Case Examples

On June 15, 1997, Dr Colin Ridyard wrote to Miss K Philpott, expressing disagreement with the explanation for the disappearance and relocation of AIR 2/16918, citing the D8/2 letter to Matthew Williams which stated the file was in MOD's hands "last year". Ridyard requested the MOD commit to urgently releasing all UFO-related documentation from 1952 to the present, with only public members' names redacted. He also requested consultation on the White Paper and proposed that UFO sightings by military personnel, airline staff, security, and medical personnel should be made an exceptional case under FOI legislation, potentially including mandatory press conferences.

Ridyard then referenced the report of 11 Col Charles Halt on the Rendlesham Forest Incident, noting abnormal radiation measurements and radiation sickness. He reiterated the MOD's stance on UFOs being "misguided" and provided several case examples to support the existence of UFOs and intelligent control:

• CASE 1: Fit Lt J Kilburn and associates reported a silver circular object at RAF Topcliffe in 1952, exhibiting intelligent control and high speed. A similar object was photographed in Germany in 1975.
• CASE 2: Personnel at RAF Church Lawford witnessed a craft accelerate to 1400mph on March 26, 1957, which was also tracked by radar, indicating intelligent control.
• CASE 3: Radar operators at West Freugh detected anomalous radar returns on April 4, 1957, described as "five reflecting objects of unidentified type and origin" with sizes larger than normal aircraft, suggesting intelligent control.
• CASE 4: Children and a teacher witnessed a craft at Rhos-y-Bol on Anglesey in 1978, displaying intelligent control and structure.
• CASE 5: A meteorological officer at RAF Shawbury witnessed a triangular craft on April 30, 1993, with details attested to in "Open Skies, Closed Minds".
• Rendlesham Forest: Mentioned again as an incident involving an intelligently controlled craft witnessed by military personnel, with induced radioactivity.

Ridyard concluded by stating that the MOD's policy of remaining unaware of evidence for UFOs contradicts facts presented by government departments and military testimony.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this collection of documents are the public's right to access government information, particularly concerning UFOs, and the challenges faced by institutions like the Public Record Office in managing and retrieving historical documents. There is a clear tension between the government's official stance on UFOs and the persistent public interest and witness testimony. The documents highlight the evolving policies regarding the preservation and release of sensitive government records, influenced by legislation like the Freedom of Information Act. The editorial stance, as represented by the inclusion of Dr Ridyard's detailed case examples and his critique of the MOD's position, leans towards advocating for greater transparency and a more open-minded approach to the study of UFO phenomena.

This document consists of two pages from a publication, likely a magazine or newsletter, focusing on UFO phenomena. Page 1 contains a numbered list of observations and conclusions regarding UFOs, describing them as intelligent, structured, and capable of advanced aerial performance. It emphasizes the credibility of trained observers and physical evidence like radar and radiation traces. Page 2 is a letter dated June 24th, 1997, from Chris Fowler to Mrs. Field at the Ministry of Defence (MoD). Fowler expresses his long-standing concerns and dissatisfaction with the MoD's responses to his inquiries about UFOs.

Letter from Chris Fowler to the Ministry of Defence Chris Fowler begins by stating he has written to Air Staff 2a on numerous occasions regarding UFOs and the MoD's involvement. He complains that his questions have received unsatisfactory answers or have been ignored. He poses several specific questions:

1. Defence Significance of UFO Reports: Fowler questions how the MoD can determine that unexplained UFO reports, such as the one video-recorded over Matlock on August 23rd, 1994, are of no defence significance when the MoD states it does not attempt to determine what these UFOs are.
2. Rentwaters UFO Incidents: He asks why the Rentwaters UFO incidents of December 1980 are not considered of defence significance, especially as they occurred near nuclear-capable military bases. He references statements by Charles Halt confirming the UFOs penetrated airspace, beams of light were seen, and MoD-taken radiation readings were abnormal. Fowler requests copies of these radiation reports and official comment on the book 'Left At East Gate' by Larry Warren and Peter Robbins.
3. PRO Document AIR 2/16918: Fowler challenges the explanation provided by Kerry Philpott regarding the whereabouts of this document. He notes that Mr. I Goode from D6/2 confirmed in writing to Matthew Williams that they had the document, contradicting earlier statements that it was missing. Fowler dismisses the explanation of a clerical error, especially since PRO staff had initially indicated the MoD had requested the document.
4. Pinehurst, Swindon UFO Sighting: Fowler refers to a UFO sighting from Pinehurst, Swindon in 1994, which was featured on BBC 2's 'Fortean Review'. He states that Air Traffic Control at RAF Lyneham confirmed that two of their controllers were involved in the programme, and that the UFO, described as a metallic disc on video, was visible on their radar screens. This incident, Fowler argues, contradicts the MoD's statement that no structured craft have penetrated the UK's airspace.

Fowler concludes by requesting a reply and expresses his belief that a scientist would adopt his perspective.

Observations from Page 1 Page 1 provides a series of points, likely from an article or a preceding part of Fowler's correspondence, that frame the discussion:

• (i) UFOs, flying saucers, or bright lights are described as solid objects flying in defiance of gravity, implying intelligent control.
• (ii) Structured craft are presented as evidence of intelligent design.
• (iii) There have been numerous credible sightings of structured, unidentified craft with aerial performance exceeding current technology.
• Point 9: A trained observer (pilot, weather observer) is not infallible, but a large number of testimonies, especially when supported by physical evidence like radar and radiation, cannot be dismissed.
• Point 10: Fowler urges the MoD to consider the contents of his letter and adopt a policy statement reflecting that intelligently controlled craft with advanced parameters are witnessed by military/civilian personnel and occasionally penetrate UK air defence regions.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance The document strongly suggests a critical stance towards the Ministry of Defence's handling of UFO reports. The recurring themes are:

• UFO Credibility: UFOs are presented as real phenomena, often intelligently controlled and exhibiting advanced technology.
• MoD Inaction/Secrecy: There is a clear accusation of the MoD being evasive, providing unsatisfactory answers, ignoring inquiries, and potentially covering up information regarding UFO sightings.
• Defence Significance: The document questions the MoD's dismissal of UFOs as being of no defence significance, particularly when sightings occur near sensitive military installations or involve craft with superior performance.
• Evidence: Emphasis is placed on the importance of physical evidence such as radar data, radiation readings, and credible witness testimony from trained observers.

The editorial stance, as conveyed through Chris Fowler's letter and the points on page 1, is one of demanding transparency and a more serious investigation into UFO phenomena by the MoD, particularly concerning potential national security implications.