Just Cause - Vol 1 Issue 06 - Old Series

Magazine Overview

Title: JUST CAUSE
Issue: VOL. 1 - NO. 6
Date: September 1978 (Late News Thru November)
Publisher: CITIZENS AGAINST UFO SECRECY (CAUS)
Document Type: Official Newsletter

FOIA Lawsuit Against CIA Nears Payday

The lead story details the progress of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, Civil Action 78-859, filed by Ground Saucer Watch, Inc. (GSW) against the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The lawsuit seeks the release of UFO-related documents. On or about December 17, 1978, the CIA is scheduled to release the results of its comprehensive search of files, as per a stipulation submitted in September 1978 by Peter Gersten, attorney for GSW. This stipulation, made an official court order by U.S. District Judge John Pratt, required the CIA to search specific components for UFO documents, determine releasibility, and index any withheld items within 90 days.

Prior to the stipulation, the CIA had indicated the location of "1,000 additional pages" of UFO materials. Subsequently, U.S. Attorney William Briggs, representing the CIA, informed Gersten that the Agency had found a "substantial" number of documents, potentially as many as 10,000.

On November 24, 1978, Briggs informed Gersten that the CIA expected to comply with the stipulation by December 17th, releasing releasable documents and providing an affidavit detailing any withheld items and the exemptions claimed. Briggs indicated the documents were substantial in number but declined to provide an exact amount due to time constraints.

Gersten also received three documents from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) forwarded from the CIA. Two of these were previously unreleased Intelligence Reports (IRs) concerning civilian UFO sightings in Iran during June and July 1978. The third was the previously released "Iranian Report" from September 1976. All three originated from the U.S. Defense Attache's Office (USDAO) in Tehran.

A significant disclosure was contained in IR 6 846 0392 78, which referenced an evaluation of the September 1976 Iranian incident by a DIA component coded "DB-3B2," identified as the "Directorate of Intelligence Research-Western Division." It remains unclear if this evaluation was completed or reached conclusions. Louis Foster, FOIA Officer of the DIA, stated he would release this evaluation document to CAUS, along with two other DIA IRs from 1974.

Confusion exists regarding how many CIA-located documents originated from the Department of Defense. Charles Hinkle, Director of Freedom of Information and Security Review, DOD, stated his office received documents from the CIA to be returned to their originators. However, Hinkle's letter mentioned only the DIA and U.S. Army, not the Air Force, which would likely have transmitted UFO-related messages to the CIA. Gersten's query to the U.S. Attorney yielded that the CIA forwarded "at least 100 documents" to the Department of Defense. If Gersten's estimate of over 5,000 CIA-located documents is correct, this suggests a significant amount of UFO data was provided to the Agency.

Speculation about the release is high, with many observers distrusting the CIA and suspecting significant material will be withheld. Former CIA employees from the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) or the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) maintain the Agency had no interest in UFOs beyond the Robertson Panel, but their credibility is questioned.

The GSW FOIA lawsuit is described as one of the most important events in UFOlogy, yet it receives little attention and support from the UFOlogical press. The article contrasts this with groups making unsubstantiated claims for publicity. CAUS thanks GSW Director William "Bill" Spaulding for his financial and moral support.

The article notes that the most difficult part of the lawsuit may be ahead, requiring GSW and Peter Gersten to overcome CIA exemptions through litigation.

Air Force, NSA, and FBI: Egg-on-the-Face Over Cuban Incident

This section details an incident involving Robert Todd, a FOIA requester, and his attempts to obtain government records concerning a UFO event over Cuba in March 1967. The incident involved the alleged "zapping" of a Cuban MIG-21 by a UFO, prompting threats from the Air Force and National Security Agency (NSA) against Todd.

On July 28, 1978, two FBI agents visited Todd at his home in Ardmore, Pennsylvania. They informed him that a statement he possessed, provided by a former NSA "security analyst" (actually a voice intercept operator), was classified "above SECRET." They warned that transmitting such information to a foreign government would violate espionage laws. Todd was read his "Miranda Rights" and was frightened by the encounter.

Despite this, Todd wrote to the Air Force and NSA, requesting clarification on which portions of the statement were classified. The NSA responded on August 8th, stating they had no record of the incident occurring but confirmed that information related to how it was obtained was classified, as its origin was a former U.S. intelligence analyst.

Daniel Silver, General Counsel for the NSA, responded with a letter that was described as "doubletalk," refusing to confirm or deny the classification of the statement or identify which portions should not be disseminated.

The Air Force's response was also evasive. Col. James Johnson, Executive Officer of the USAF's Office of the Judge Advocate General, stated that the Air Force could neither confirm nor deny the authenticity of the "statement" or the existence of records concerning the incident. However, he advised that if authentic, the statement would be classified "SECRET in its entirety."

Col. Johnson stated that the Air Force could only release letters Todd had sent and received, excluding the "security analyst's" statement. Other responsive documents were exempt from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(1) and (b)(5), citing classification in the interest of national defense, revealing Air Force intelligence interests, and being pre-decisional.

CAUS comments that the reactions of the NSA and Air Force collectively suggest confirmation of the source's description of the incident. They acted like "Nixon's plumbers" in a "near-panic attempt" to suppress information about an "amazing UFO incident."

CAUS Director Todd Zechel vouches for the sincerity and honesty of the NSA source and states that both the source and Robert Todd have been shaken but remain determined to uncover and disseminate the truth. CAUS pledges to support their efforts.

Legal Pursuit Fund Off to Modest Start

CAUS announced that the "Legal Pursuit Fund," established to retain legal consultant Peter Gersten for FOIA lawsuits and to defend individuals involved in UFO disclosure, has received its first donation of $200 from an anonymous benefactor.

The benefactor's note emphasizes the importance of using the FOIA to uncover information about UFOs and "crashed saucer" stories, stating it should have been established by researchers long ago.

CAUS hopes to build this "defense" fund to enable them to file lawsuits and assist those facing difficulties due to UFO-related disclosures. They note that Mr. Gersten has donated significant time and that a retainer fee would be necessary for his continued involvement in litigation.

1959 "Psychic" Incident Added to UFO Folklore: CAUS Finds Discrepancies

This article investigates the 1959 "Psychic Incident" that reportedly occurred at a CIA building in Washington, D.C. CAUS Director W. Todd Zechel has undertaken a nearly two-year investigation into this case.

The incident, reported to have occurred on July 6, 1959, involved a UFO appearing upon request and being viewed by CIA personnel, with radar confirmation. The account is primarily based on a report by Major Robert Friend, USAF, Commanding Officer of Project Blue Book, featured in the book and movie "UFOs: Past, Present, and Future" by Robert Emenegger. The versions were based on a document provided by Dr. David Jacobs, author of "The UFO Controversy in America," who found Friend's memo in Dr. J. Allen Hynek's files.

Jacobs interviewed Friend and was sworn to secrecy regarding the names of participants, who were CIA and Navy personnel. CAUS criticizes Jacobs and Emenegger/Sandler for publicizing the incident without verifying details.

Zechel's investigation focused on Mrs. Guy Swan of Elliot, Maine, who claimed in 1954 to be in contact with extraterrestrials orbiting Earth via an artificial satellite, communicating through a "sound-on-sound" device. She shared this with retired Navy Admiral Knowles and his wife. Admiral Knowles contacted the Office of Naval Intelligence, leading to an FBI investigation in 1954.

In July 1959, USN Commander Julius M. Larsen, an ONI liaison officer to the CIA's Photographic Interpretation Center, encountered Knowles' letter. Larsen, needing flying time, flew to Maine with a Lt. Commander and spoke with Mrs. Swan. He was impressed but confused, as Mrs. Swan demonstrated automatic writing, which he assumed was her method of communicating with aliens.

On July 6, 1959, Larsen visited the Photo Interpretation Center Director, Arthur Lundahl, who was interested in UFOs and psychic phenomena. Larsen entered a trance and engaged in automatic writing. Present were Lundahl and his assistant, Lt. Cmdr. Robert Neasham. Neasham, who had analyzed the Newhouse/Tremonton UFO film with Harry Woo, had concluded the objects were extraterrestrial spacecraft and was upset when the "seagull" explanation was accepted by the Robertson Panel.

Larsen wrote answers to his questions, which appeared as "childish scrawls" to Lundahl. Neasham, however, was more impressed and asked for proof. Larsen then suggested they look out the window, stating, "we'll fly by for you."

Lundahl stated he saw no spaceship or UFO, nor did Neasham to his knowledge. However, Neasham may have suspected a UFO behind cloud formations. Neasham possibly influenced Lundahl to report the trance session to Project Blue Book, possibly by claiming Washington National Airport radar was "blocked out" during the sighting.

Neasham then contacted Major Friend, inviting him to Washington for a "TOP SECRET" briefing. Friend arrived expecting a briefing but was instead taken to Lundahl's office where Neasham briefed him on the July 6th incident. Friend was impressed, not realizing he might be receiving erroneous information. Larsen later attempted to re-contact Mrs. Swan's aliens, but nothing happened.

Friend filed a report but was told to drop the matter. The incident resurfaced due to Jacobs finding Friend's memo and opportunistic writers.

Upcoming Issues

JUST CAUSE plans to publish at least two issues in December, covering CIA documents, KGB interests in UFOs, DIA and Air Force UFO sightings, Navy reports, and a crashed saucer update.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of JUST CAUSE are government secrecy surrounding UFO information, the use of FOIA as a tool for disclosure, and the critical examination of UFO incidents and claims. The editorial stance is one of skepticism towards official explanations and a strong advocacy for transparency and public access to information regarding UFOs. CAUS positions itself as a watchdog organization actively investigating and challenging perceived cover-ups by intelligence agencies and the military.

Title: JUST CAUSE
Issue: Vol. 1 - No. 6
Date: November 1978 (inferred from CIA letter date)
Publisher: CAUS (Center for UFO Studies)

This issue of JUST CAUSE delves into the complexities of UFO investigations, focusing on the critical analysis of witness testimony and the role of government agencies. It features a detailed examination of the "Ft. Riley Landing" case, questioning its veracity, and discusses the broader landscape of UFOlogy, including the challenges posed by unsubstantiated claims and the release of government documents.

FT. RILEY LANDING: HOAX OR DELUSION?

The lead article scrutinizes the claims of Aaron David Kaback, a former soldier stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas, who asserted he guarded a "flying saucer" that landed at the base in November 1965. The investigation, conducted by CAUS, highlights significant inconsistencies in Kaback's narrative. Initially, Kaback claimed the incident occurred in November 1965, but his military discharge papers (DD214) indicated he received a hardship discharge in July 1965, making his presence at the base in November of that year questionable. Kaback's explanation for this discrepancy was simply, "I just forgot."

Further complicating the account, Kaback's description of the object, an oval craft approximately 35 to 48 feet in diameter with a fin and exhaust port, was compared to other UFO literature. He also claimed to have been ordered to guard the object by a two-star General, identified as "Gen. Seaman, the commanding general of Fort Riley." However, when CAUS contacted General Seaman (Johnathon O. Seaman, retired), he had no recollection of any such incident and seemed taken aback by the inquiry, suggesting the call might be from a mental hospital. When CAUS played the tape of Seaman's conversation to Kaback, Kaback admitted the General was "lying" about not remembering, but later conceded it seemed the General was telling the truth, further undermining Kaback's credibility.

Kaback also reported receiving threatening phone calls telling him to "Keep your mouth shut!" He initially expressed extreme fear for his life, but his demeanor did not match his claims. Later, he suggested the calls were likely intended for his brother, who had a bar fight. CAUS concluded these threats were contrived. Additionally, Kaback produced a letter to his now-divorced wife, allegedly written shortly after the incident, which closely mimicked the wording of a diary entry from the "Fritz Werner" case, raising suspicions of fabrication.

Despite Kaback's insistence on anonymity, his actions, such as providing his home phone number to radio stations, led CAUS to believe he had compromised his own confidentiality. The magazine suggests Kaback's desire for anonymity was to avoid responsibility for a "bogus story." The case was ultimately deemed a hoax or a delusion by CAUS, though UFOlogist Len Stringfield reportedly proceeded with presenting Kaback's story at a MUFON Symposium.

UFOS IN PERSPECTIVE: COMMENTARY BY CAUS DIRECTOR W. TODD ZECHEL

In this commentary, CAUS Director W. Todd Zechel critiques the historical handling of UFO sightings by the Air Force and the methods employed by modern "debunkers." He recalls the Air Force's Project Blue Book, which claimed to identify 90% of sightings, a figure often met with skepticism by believers who felt identifications were assigned arbitrarily. Zechel notes that recent debunkers have employed similar hit-and-miss methods, sometimes attributing UFOs to discredited theories like electrical plasma.

Zechel criticizes popular media outlets, such as Time magazine, for reviving outdated theories like the "glowing bug theory," which he dismisses as foolish. He argues that these simplistic explanations fail to account for the more complex aspects of the UFO phenomenon, such as sightings near sensitive military installations, interactions with foreign governments, and the involvement of intelligence agencies like the CIA in collecting information and engaging in psychological warfare.

He acknowledges that many UFO reports can be explained, citing the work of Al Hendry, Chief Investigator for the Center For UFO Studies (CUFOS), who has gathered objective evidence indicating most reports are based on mundane phenomena or emotional reactions. Hendry's approach is highlighted as exemplary due to its objectivity, contrasting with debunkers who start with the premise that UFOs cannot exist and then seek to disprove them.

Zechel also addresses the "scientific" position on UFOs, which dismisses anything not ultimately identifiable as terrestrial. He likens this stance to historical religious persecution, where those who questioned established dogma were branded as heretics. He laments that instead of physical torture, modern "heretics" face smear campaigns and lies.

The commentary touches upon military encounters with UFOs, including radar tracking and evasive maneuvers, as well as the phenomenon of cattle mutilation. Zechel questions the logic behind the Air Force's repeated claims that no investigated UFO indicated an extraterrestrial vehicle, asking how they can know what something isn't without knowing what it is.

He satirizes "Military Intelligence" and points to historical failures like Watergate and Iran, suggesting that if a President can repeatedly hit his head on a helicopter door, almost anything can be botched. Zechel also debunks the popular conspiracy theory of a "government cover-up" involving recovered crashed saucers at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, suggesting that if aliens are having as many accidents as humans, they might not be worth knowing.

Government Document Releases

The issue includes correspondence from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) dated December 14, 1978, addressed to Peter A. Gersten, Esquire, regarding a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request related to "Ground Saucer Watch, Inc. v. CIA, et al." The letter details the release of 397 CIA documents, with 340 released and 57 withheld. It also lists documents retrieved from other government agencies, including the Air Force (76 documents), DIA (19), Army (30), Navy (11), NSA (18), and State Department (41). The fee for reproduction of these documents is 10 cents per page, with a total of $90.00 requested for the initial release.

Additionally, there is a list of NSA referred documents, totaling 18, which were referred by the CIA via classified letters in November 1978. These documents date from January 1958 to February 1978.

Comment: UFOlogists and Case Investigations

The final comment in the issue criticizes UFOlogists who promote unsubstantiated claims or continuously apologize for inconsistencies in witness stories. The author argues that such practices do a disservice to the field by promoting weak or phony cases, which overshadows the painstaking work of detailed investigations conducted by organizations like CAUS, CUFOS, and MUFON. The difficulty of separating credible evidence from noise is emphasized.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of JUST CAUSE demonstrates a strong editorial stance favoring critical analysis and skepticism towards UFO claims, particularly those lacking corroborating evidence or riddled with inconsistencies. The magazine champions rigorous investigation and transparency, as evidenced by its engagement with FOIA requests and its detailed debunking of the Ft. Riley case. The publication appears to be a proponent of separating factual evidence from speculation, hoaxes, and delusions within the UFO field, while also critiquing both official government stances and the methods of some UFO researchers and debunkers. The recurring theme is the pursuit of truth through careful examination and a healthy dose of skepticism.