Orbiter - No 19 - 1989

Magazine Overview

Title: ORBITER
Issue: #19
Date: July/August 1989
Publisher: The New England Aerial Phenomena Report
Country: USA

This issue of Orbiter focuses on UFO reports and related phenomena, featuring a prominent report on a daylight sighting at Otis AFB, Cape Cod, MA, by DoD police. It also includes updates on the Gulf Breeze photographs, an introduction to a new organization, and a compilation of fireball sightings.

UFO Report: Sighting at Otis AFB, Cape Cod, MA

The lead article details a preliminary investigation into a UFO sighting that occurred on May 28, 1989, between 1345 and 1400 hrs at Otis Air Force Base, Cape Cod, MA. The report is based on the account of Sgt. Trill (pseudonym), a Department of Defense police officer. While on routine patrol, Sgt. Trill observed a vapor trail from a high-flying aircraft heading north to south. Beneath this trail, he noticed an object, described as a dot, heading south to north. The object was at approximately 40/45 degrees above the horizon.

Sgt. Trill followed the object as it descended towards the main artery of the base. It was then described as a dark grey sphere, about the size of a tire, with no wings, lights, or windows, and was noiseless. It descended rapidly towards a field where a Bell Huey UH-1 helicopter was hovering at 10-15 ft. The sphere approached to within 25 ft. behind the helicopter, then, at twice the speed of its descent, made a sudden dive, ascended 30 ft., and disappeared. Sgt. Trill described the maneuver as a "check mark" (✔). Another DoD patrolman, Jones (pseudonym), witnessed the event and confirmed seeing it. Attempts to find other witnesses among a nearby maintenance crew were unsuccessful as the tent faced away from the field.

Weather data from Chatham, Cape Cod, indicated winds from the N/W at 22 mph with gusts up to 29 mph, and a high temperature of 66 degrees with clear skies. A weather balloon was launched at 7 a.m., described as light-tan. The report notes that Patrolman Jones has not yet been interviewed due to wedding plans, but an interview is anticipated. Sgt. Trill, a Vietnam veteran, expressed no preconceived thoughts on UFO phenomena and stated he would not have come forward if Patrolman Jones had not also witnessed it. He is not seeking publicity or financial gain. The report also touches on the psychological effects of the sighting, with Sgt. Trill now patrolling the area more frequently and looking for unusual phenomena. A rapport between Sgt. Trill and Patrolman Jones has reportedly dissipated, which Sgt. Trill described as "strange" and possibly due to second-guessing. Efforts are underway to locate the pilot and co-pilot of the Huey UH-1, who reportedly appeared startled and left the area immediately after the sighting.

Communiques and Bits n' Pieces

This section features several short items. One is a letter from former Bluebook Chief Major Dewey J. Fournet Jr. USAFR, responding to a commentary about a "Cover-up/Debunking Program." Major Fournet denies that he and Ed Ruppelt ever "concoted a plan to give the American public the facts about UFOs" and categorically denies any official cover-up or debunking policy orchestrated by the CIA, stating the CIA's only role was a briefing that made them aware of the problems in USAF UFO investigations.

Another item notes Tom Benson, New Jersey State Director of MUFON, resigning over "further whitewashing policies issued by the MUFON hierarchy." It also quotes MUFON Director W. Andrus suggesting Bigfoot could be experimental animals or UFO aliens testing Earth's environment. The editor comments, "So much for Mr. science!"

A letter from Ed Walters of Gulf Breeze, FL, responds to a critique by Dr. Willy Smith. Walters states he is tired of attacks on his character and addresses Dr. Smith's comment that "even the Mayor and the Chief of Police didn't like him." Walters counters by mentioning a recent thank-you letter from the Mayor and his re-appointment to the City Planning Board. Walters also addresses his police record, explaining a teenage incident involving joyriding and a bad check, claiming the charges were dropped and he pled guilty to the bad check. The editor notes that joyriding doesn't typically result in jail time and that the bad check was actually forged, expressing a "gut feeling" that many people involved are in for a surprise.

Statement of Position by Dr. Willy Smith

Dr. Willy Smith of the UNICAT Project submits a statement regarding computer-enhanced image analysis of photographs from the Gulf Breeze case. The analysis considered photos of a girl with an anomalous image and alleged UFOs obtained by Mr. Walters/Hanson. The results indicated the girl's photos were obtained by double exposure, while the UFO photos showed a "well defined supporting structure under the alleged spacecraft." Dr. Smith criticizes the reaction of proponents, describing their communiques as "malicious gossiping" aimed at cushioning the negative impact of the analysis. He notes that the time-honored pattern in politics is what is believed, not what is true. Authorship of the images is attributed to various UFO figures, but Dr. Smith states he will not dignify them with a formal response until he receives signed copies of statements. Questions have arisen regarding copyright protection of the photos, with the lawyer initially representing Mr. Walters no longer doing so. Information from the copyright office has raised doubts about the validity of the copyright and disclosed possibilities based on "fair use." The editor notes that Dr. Smith promises more information in future issues.

Introduction to Aerial Anomalies International

This section introduces Aerial Anomalies International, a non-profit association founded on June 26, 1989, based in Mobile, Alabama. The introduction discusses the historical observation of unusual sky phenomena and the various names given to them, such as angels, flying shields, mystery airships, phantom planes, ghost rockets, flying saucers, and UFOs. The organization argues that these terms are often inaccurate or misleading. They propose classifying observations into two broad categories: (1) Natural aerial phenomena and (2) Unknown aerial phenomena (having an apparent intelligent source). The organization opposes the use of misleading names that create a false impression and seeks the help of experienced and knowledgeable people to overcome the stigma attached to the subject. They encourage investigators and researchers to share their work and findings, aiming to make factual information available to associates and the public.

Fireball Reports

This section compiles a list of fireball sightings from various locations and dates in 1988:

• Texas, USA (May 17, 1988): A white fireball of magnitude 10, observed for an unspecified duration, vanished above the horizon.
• Oklahoma, USA (December 10, 1988): A bright, moon-like fireball with a reddish-orange color and yellow fringe, leaving a luminous yellow trail, was observed for 6 seconds and vanished above the horizon.
• Australia (January 13, 1988): A bright green fireball of magnitude -8 was observed for an unspecified duration and vanished above the horizon.
• North Sea (January 31, 1988): Multiple Lufthansa flight crews reported white objects with landing lights, some changing to blue-green or green, observed for 5 seconds and disappearing above or below the horizon.
• Oregon, USA (February 8, 1988): A brief sighting of 2 seconds with an unknown altitude was reported.
• W. Pacific Ocean (March 8, 1988): A Quantas flight crew observed a yellow object changing to white, red, then yellow, with a long, thin trail, which fragmented into two pieces and vanished above the horizon.
• Oklahoma/Texas, USA (March 13, 1988): Multiple observers reported bright fireballs, some with green trails and sparks, lasting between 3-10 seconds, vanishing behind hills or over the horizon.
• Pennsylvania, USA (April 8, 1988): An object brighter than the full moon, casting shadows, with a trail that lasted 20 seconds, flashed and vanished above the horizon.
• Hawaii, USA (April 17, 1988): An object too bright to look at, with yellow sparks, was observed for 3-4 seconds and vanished above the horizon.

The Nippon T.V. Interview (Part Three)

This installment of the interview with Charles Lee (Interviewer), Barry Greenwood (BG), and Larry Fawcett (LF) continues the discussion about a lawsuit concerning UFO documents. They explain that the material was classified top-secret, and even their lawyer, Mr. Gersten, was not allowed to see it. The affidavit was prepared by Eugene Yates, the Attorney General for the U.S., but Greenwood and Fawcett claim they never saw the document during the proceedings. They state that the CIA suit was for documents, and they maintained that UFOs were not a threat to national security, citing government studies. They filed a lawsuit because they felt withholding UFO material was not a legitimate exemption.

When asked about the affidavit's contents, Greenwood stated they don't know the reasons why UFO material was withheld, as they were presented with heavily censored documents. Fawcett suggests that the fact that they lost the case and the reasons were not fully disclosed, with the affidavit being censored, is significant. He questions why there is so much secrecy if UFOs do not exist.

They discuss that this admission of hiding information is big news, indirectly admitting UFOs exist. Greenwood emphasizes that CAUS has hard evidence that the government has misinformed the public about UFOs, understating its importance. Fawcett notes that while the issue should have been publicized, the media did not pick it up, and people are astounded when shown the documents. He suggests that due to past events like Watergate, the public is more accustomed to "dirty tricks" and less outraged than people in other countries. Greenwood compares the government's actions to the Watergate case and expresses frustration that the media often portrays UFOs with an outdated, sensationalized view, making it difficult to get the subject taken seriously.

Fawcett recounts promoting their book "Clear Intent" in front of the Pentagon, where he had to issue a challenge to get media attention, attracting reporters from various countries.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around UFO sightings, government secrecy surrounding UFO phenomena, and the efforts of individuals and organizations to uncover and disseminate information. The editorial stance appears to be one of skepticism towards official explanations and a belief that there is a deliberate effort to conceal information about UFOs. The magazine actively promotes the investigation of anomalous aerial phenomena and encourages public awareness, while also critiquing debunking efforts and perceived whitewashing within organizations like MUFON. The interview with Fawcett and Greenwood strongly suggests a belief in government cover-ups and a desire for transparency regarding UFO data.

This issue of UFO Magazine, Volume 1, Issue 11, dated 1988, with a cover price of $3.50, focuses on the challenges of media coverage and legal proceedings related to UFO phenomena. The main cover headline appears to be 'UFO Magazine'. The magazine explores how the media handles UFO-related stories and the legal hurdles faced when trying to present evidence in court.

Media and Reporting on UFO Cases

The issue begins with a discussion on how to get the media to report on UFO cases. The speaker challenges reporters to pick any case, conduct investigative reporting, and if a cover-up by the government is found, to air it. Conversely, if the story is false, it should also be presented. Ted Turner from Cable News Network is highlighted for picking up a case from England that occurred in 1980. He conducted a six-month investigation and produced a week-long television show that reportedly proved a cover-up. However, it is noted that this did not lead to major revelations, and the media's reluctance to cover stories unless they are national issues is discussed. Ted Turner is described as a 'maverick' in television, which might explain his willingness to pursue such stories.

Legal System and UFO Evidence

A significant portion of the magazine discusses the legal system's handling of UFO-related evidence. A former policeman with twenty years of experience is interviewed about how evidence is viewed in court cases. The interviewer questions a ruling made by a judge who, according to the interviewee, ruled on a UFO case based only on a 21-page affidavit, without seeing the full two hundred and ten or fifteen pages of documents that supposedly existed. This practice is described as a 'foul' and is stated to be common in everyday law, where judges can rule without seeing all the evidence. The interviewee explains that for the government to withhold evidence, they must show the judge positive proof that releasing it would harm national security. However, the question is raised about how a judge can trust such a claim without seeing the evidence themselves. It is suggested that this is political, as the judge is being told by a federal official who is paid by the government and must abide by certain lines. This leads to a one-sided argument where the judge listens to the government's side without allowing the opposing attorney to present their views.

Majestic 12 (MJ-12) Documents

The issue also touches upon the 'Majestic 12' (MJ-12) documents. The interviewee expresses initial excitement upon receiving these documents, seeing them as what they had been looking for. However, after scrutinizing them, particularly with the help of someone named Barry who worked extensively on the documents, they began finding faults. The process of deeper investigation is described as becoming a 'quagmire'. The discussion on MJ-12 is marked as 'CONTINUED NEXT ISSUE'.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The magazine appears to adopt a critical stance towards both media coverage and the legal system's handling of UFO-related information. It questions the transparency of media reporting and highlights potential biases or limitations in how UFO phenomena are presented to the public. The legal discussions suggest a skepticism towards government claims of national security being used to withhold evidence, implying a systemic issue where the judiciary may be unduly influenced by executive branch assertions. The focus on the Majestic 12 documents indicates a continued interest in investigating alleged government secrecy and the authenticity of purported UFO-related files. The editorial stance seems to be one of advocating for more thorough and open investigation into UFO phenomena, challenging established institutions to be more transparent and accountable.