Just Cause - 1994 09 - No 41 - New Series

Magazine Overview

This issue of JUST CAUSE, number 41, dated September 1994, is edited by Barry Greenwood and published by Citizens Against UFO Secrecy. Due to staffing shortages, the issue is slightly delayed but promises four quarterly numbers. The magazine focuses on UFO research, with a particular emphasis on document authenticity and historical accuracy.

Editorial

The editor, Barry Greenwood, apologizes for the delay in publication due to staffing shortages but assures subscribers that they will still receive four quarterly issues. He mentions that many interesting stories are awaiting publication. The editorial highlights ongoing research into the 1947 UFO wave, with six volumes of clippings already compiled, primarily focusing on the northeastern United States. Readers are urged to contribute any press stories or unusual ephemera from 1947 to aid this worldwide effort. The editor notes the difficulty in convincing people to search local archives and the intimidation many UFOlogists feel towards microfilm and readers. He also points out that non-English coverage of UFOs is being found in foreign sources.

Altered Document Discovered in Roswell Debate

This section critically examines a document presented by proponents of the Roswell incident as evidence of a U.S. Air Force policy on crashed-disc recovery. The article reveals that this document has been altered, with the apparent intention of convincing readers that the Air Force had officially approved guidelines for handling downed UFOs, including foreign space vehicles. In reality, the document is identified as a November 3, 1961, draft proposal memo concerning the staffing of intelligence teams for various purposes, including the intelligence collection activities of proposed Projects Moon Dust and Blue Fly. These projects are often cited as evidence of procedures for the 'exploitation' of unknown crashed vehicles.

The article presents Exhibit 1, an authentic copy of the memo obtained by Robert Todd via FOIA in August 1979. This original memo contains a handwritten notation by Lt. Colonel Norman M. Rosner stating, 'This draft proposal was not approved and was not forwarded for action.' Furthermore, page two of the original memo has 'No' markings next to the definitions of Moon Dust and Blue Fly, indicating a rejection of these projects at that time.

In contrast, the article discusses a version of the memo found in Kevin Randle and Donald Schmitt's book, 'The Truth About The UFO Crash At Roswell,' and Clifford Stone's book, 'UFOS: Let The Evidence Speak For Itself.' This version, appearing on page 206 of the former and pages 202-203 of the latter, shows significant alterations. The Rosner notation and the 'No' markings are missing, and the document appears to have been 'whited-out' or otherwise obscured. The article suggests that this altered version elevates the document from a rejected draft proposal to 'official Air Force policy.'

The editor notes that the altered version is likely several generations removed from the authentic copy, indicating it was recopied after being changed. A key piece of evidence is the presence of paper punch holes on the letterhead of the authentic document (Exhibit 1), consistent with government binding. The altered versions, however, show a paper punch hole that appears to have been made by Robert Todd to bind his photocopy, suggesting his copy was the basis for the subsequent alterations.

The article traces the origin of the altered document's dissemination, noting that Kevin Randle's copy came from Clifford Stone. Stone's book reproduces the altered document. Robert Todd inquired about Stone's source, and Stone responded that the memo was released by the Department of Defense via the State Department. The editor expresses suspicion that the altered document was based on Todd's original copy rather than a direct government release.

On the Origin of the Term UFO

This section investigates the origin of the term 'UFO' (Unidentified Flying Object). Conventional thinking attributes the term to Captain Edward Ruppelt, head of the Air Force's UFO investigations from 1951-53, who claimed to have created it to replace 'flying saucers.' However, the article presents evidence from an Air Force report, Air Intelligence Division Study #203, dated December 10, 1948. This report, titled 'Analysis of Flying Object Incidents in the U.S.,' contains the phrase 'unidentifiable flying object' in Appendix G, page 9, in reference to an event on November 18, 1948. Page 13 of the same report, dated August 19, 1948, uses the exact phrase 'unidentified flying object' in official use.

The article questions Ruppelt's claim, noting that he left the Air Force after World War II and returned to active duty during the Korean War, placing him outside the period when the AIDS 203 report was created. The author suggests that Ruppelt may have rediscovered the phrase or reinvented it, but the evidence indicates the term existed and was in official use three years before Ruppelt claimed to have coined it. The author of Appendix G of AIDS 203 is credited with coining the phrase.

Air Force Reacts Officially to Bogus Documents

This section discusses a new procedure implemented by the Air Force to combat the influx of hoaxed documents, such as those related to the MJ-12 deception. The Air Force has created a rubber stamp to label questionable material as 'NOT AN OFFICIAL USAF DOCUMENT,' 'NOT CLASSIFIED,' or 'SUSPECTED FORGERY OR BOGUS DOCUMENT.' The article notes that in the past, the Air Force and other agencies were slow to rebut suspicious papers, allowing controversies to fester. This new procedure aims to address hoaxes more quickly, preventing the need for extensive rebuttals later.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of evidence, particularly official documents, and the pursuit of accurate historical accounts in UFO research. The editorial stance is one of skepticism towards unverified claims and a strong emphasis on rigorous investigation and verification of sources. The magazine advocates for transparency and challenges potentially misleading narratives, as demonstrated by the detailed analysis of the altered Roswell document and the investigation into the origin of the term 'UFO.' The publication also highlights the ongoing problem of document forgeries in the field and the importance of discerning authentic information from fabricated material.