Just Cause - 1992 12 - No 34 - New Series

Magazine Overview

Title: JUST CAUSE
Issue: NUMBER 34
Date: December 1992
Publisher: Lawrence Fawcett
Editor: Barry Greenwood
Country of Publication: USA
Language: English
Price: $15 US, $20 Foreign

Editorial: UFOs in the Press

The editorial section of this issue expresses mixed feelings about the increased media attention to UFOs. The good news is that UFOs are making a comeback in the press. However, the bad news is that the quality of this coverage is deemed deplorable. The New York Post's headline "Daffy Doc" and Hustler Magazine's article "UFO Nuts" are cited as examples of irresponsible reporting that attacks individuals involved in UFO research. Harpers Magazine is also criticized for a transcript of court testimony from a tabloid writer who admitted to falsifying UFO tales. The editorial acknowledges that serious UFO researchers have little control over this broad media portrayal. It advises researchers to practice restraint by separating personal beliefs from information, showing intolerance for nonsense, and presenting the best evidence for the reality of the UFO phenomenon, rather than the most bizarre aspects.

FOIA Dirty Tricks

This section reports on a story from Common Cause magazine concerning an ad hoc group involving NASA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Energy. This group convened to study the SP-100 program (a plan for a nuclear-powered space station on the moon) and instructed an employee of the NASA Lewis Research Center to prepare a memo in November 1989 titled "Suggestions for Anticipating Requests Under the Freedom of Information Act." The memo contained suggestions such as reviewing notes at the end of the day and destroying them if they could have an adverse impact, using 'yellow stick-ons' for annotations which could then be destroyed, and avoiding cross-references to documents that could lend context. The document was discovered by a subcommittee of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. NASA Administrator Richard Truly repudiated the memo, but the article suggests this is an example of government agencies subverting the Freedom of Information Act and maintaining a double standard between public pronouncements and private actions.

Files Reveal Scientist Dodged UFO Bullet: Prosecution Avoided

This lengthy article details the case of Dr. Anthony Mirarchi, a research chemist who worked for the Air Force's Geophysical Research Directorate. In February 1951, Dr. Urner Liddell of the Office of Naval Research declared that flying saucer reports were nothing more than "Skyhooks" – large research balloons designed to study cosmic rays. Liddell illustrated his point with a photo of a Skyhook balloon that resembled a saucer. Dr. Mirarchi, however, took exception to Liddell's statements, suggesting that flying saucers could be experiments by a potential enemy of the United States, posing a national security threat. Mirarchi, who had studied 300 flying saucer reports, believed that while some sightings might be Skyhooks, not all were explainable. He felt Liddell's conclusions created a false sense of security. Air Force spokesmen consistently dismissed flying saucers, but Mirarchi insisted there was evidence to support his conclusions. His statements to the Quincy Patriot Ledger led to an FBI inquiry about possible prosecution for violating national security. A memo from Colonel Kenneth King of the Counter Intelligence Division noted that Mirarchi was assigned to a classified project 'Unusual Light Phenomena' and his work involved examining OSI reports regarding 'Flying Saucers,' which were classified Confidential and Secret. His employment with the Geophysical Laboratory was terminated in October 1950. The memo also stated that an article in the Quincy Patriot Ledger quoted Mirarchi on his observations and research work, and the Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories reported that the information released was classified Confidential.

Lt. Colonel Frederic C. E. Oder of the Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories opined that the information released by Mirarchi could cause serious harm to the country's internal security. However, Brigadier General W.M. Garland, Chief of Air Technical Intelligence Center, suggested that a trial might not disclose more classified information, as much material on 'saucers' had already been published. Garland also noted that the official view was that aerial phenomena were related to natural physical laws, leading to the declassification of most 'saucer' work. The article notes that it is unknown if Mirarchi realized the extent of the government's interest in him. He was a leader of Project Twinkle, an Air Force effort to study the "Green Fireball" phenomena. Mirarchi's observations contradicted official policy, and he had worked with government information to conclude that the phenomena were significant. The article draws a parallel between Mirarchi and modern-day whistleblowers. It questions why Dr. Liddell was not under similar scrutiny for his statements on Skyhook research. The article also points out a pattern where high-ranking military officials seemed to deny the existence of physical evidence for UFOs, citing the 1947 Twining memo and the 1948 Estimate of the Situation, which argued for UFO reality but against physical evidence. Dr. Mirarchi, now deceased, echoed his earlier views in a 1976 letter, stating, "I am sorry, but there are no Flying Saucers. Missiles and experimental aircraft, yes. All the time." The irony is noted that a skeptic of alien UFOs was nearly prosecuted by the Air Force, which many researchers believed was tormenting them for their pro-alien views.

More on the Crashed Saucer Front

This section discusses issues surrounding the Roswell UFO incident, focusing on allegations of falsified evidence by Gerald Anderson, a claimant featured in the book "CRASH AT CORONA" by Don Schmitt and Kevin Randle. Anderson, who claimed to have been involved in seeing the wreckage of an alleged UFO on the Plains of San Agustin in New Mexico, admitted to lying about the length of a phone conversation with author Kevin Randle and forging a phony phone bill to substantiate his claim. The disputed phone call was claimed by Anderson to be 26 minutes, while Randle's taped recording verified it was 54 minutes. Anderson's photocopied phone bill did not match the microfilmed bill from Southwestern Bell, indicating falsification. Anderson confessed to this falsification in September 1992. The authors of "CRASH AT CORONA" have not yet made a public announcement of these developments. The article argues that if a witness falsifies his story and manufactures documentation, all other aspects of his story become suspect. The Roswell investigation is expected to suffer from these developments, emphasizing the need for honest and clean investigations from both pro and con sides.

Maritime Aerial Phenomena

This section presents a series of reports of "Celestial Phenomenon" extracted from the U.S. Hydrographic Office's weekly publication "Notice to Mariners," which has been published since the 1800s. These reports, which began appearing in the late 1950s and continued into the mid-1960s, are drawn from ships' logs. Three specific entries are included:

1. North Atlantic (December 1, 1962): Second Officer H. Rathsack of the SS Overseas Rebecca reported observing a mysterious object bearing 130° altitude 20°, appearing first like a comet with a tall tail, then like an atomic mushroom. It was visible for about 40 minutes and faded with sunrise.
2. North Pacific (September 21, 1961): Second Officer William C. Ash of the SS Iberville reported a white opaque mass appearing in the northwest, which climbed and opened into a halo with a bright satellite. It diminished and faded out.
3. North Pacific (April 4, 1963): Junior Second Officer B. Gronberg of the Swedish MV Kungsholm reported observing a white cloud that transformed into concentric rings with bright white dots in the center. The phenomenon moved rapidly westward and disappeared.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of Just Cause are the critical examination of media reporting on UFOs, the importance of government transparency and accountability (particularly concerning the Freedom of Information Act), and the investigation of specific UFO cases and historical phenomena. The editorial stance is one of skepticism towards sensationalized media coverage and government secrecy, advocating for rigorous evidence-based research and open access to information. The magazine appears to champion the cause of UFO researchers who face challenges from both the media and governmental bodies, highlighting instances where individuals who pursued UFO investigations faced personal or professional repercussions. The issue also demonstrates a commitment to uncovering and presenting potentially overlooked or suppressed information, as seen in the "Maritime Aerial Phenomena" section.