Suppressed Inventions and Other Discoveries (52 page)

There is no limit placed on the number of individuals who could thus be arbitrarily quarantined.
The definition of "extra-terrestrial exposure" is left entirely up to the NASA administrator, who is thus endowed with total dictatorial powers to be exercised at his slightest caprice, which is completely contrary to the Constitution.
According to Dr. Clifford, whose commanding officers have been assuring the public for the last thirty-nine years that UFOs are nothing more than hoaxes and delusions to be dismissed with a condescending smile, "This is really no joke; it's a very serious matter."
This legislation was buried in the 1211th subsection of the 14th section of a batch of regulations very few members of government probably bothered to read in its entirety—the proverbial needle in the haystack—and was slipped onto the books without public debate.
Thus from one day to the next we learn that without having informed the public, in its infinite wisdom, the government of the United States has created a whole new criminal class: UFO contactees.

Source:MUFONETNetwork,March23,1993

309

The lame excuse offered by NASA as a sugar coating for this bitter pill is that extra-terrestrials might have a virus that could wipe out the human race. This is certainly one of the many possibilities inherent in such contact, but just as certainly not the only one, and in itself not a valid reason to make all contact illegal or to declare contactees criminals to be jailed and fined immediately.

It appears the primary effect of such a law would not be to prevent contact: it would be to silence witnesses.
According to NASA spokesman Fletcher Reel, the law as it stands is not immediately applicable, but in case of need could quickly be made applicable. What this means is that it is ambiguously worded, so that it can be interpreted either one way or the other, as the government desires.
It is certainly not a coincidence that Dr. Clifford held his press conference during the period when the popularity of the film E. T. was at its peak. As E. T. portrayed a type of extra-terrestrial that was benevolent and lovable, the inference is that the press conference was intended to discourage attempts to communicate or fraternize with UFO occupants. However, instead of having the intended effect, it backfired, causing public furore.
There may be some relationship between this fiasco and the next semiofficially endorsed attempt to deal with the subject of extra-terrestrials, the TV series V which was featured with repeat performances and maximum publicity by major networks worldwide. The aliens portrayed in V are the most horrifying and repulsive nightmares imaginable, but are defeated thanks largely to a CIA hit man specializing in covert operations.

The
Stonewalling
of High
Strangeness

George Andrews

A large crack appeared in the stonewalling of high strangeness on October 14, 1988. On that date, there was a semi-official admission of extra-terrestrial intervention in human affairs, in the guise of a two-hour TV special entitled UFO COVER-UP? . . . LIVE! Participation by U.S. and Soviet officials was so extensive that the broadcast could not have occurred without the consent of both governments.

The program was presented to the public simultaneously in the United States and the Soviet Union, the first time in history that any TV program had received such preferential treatment. However, in spite of this clearly implied U.S.-U.S.S.R. seal of approval (or perhaps because of it?), the program contained a clever mix of information and disinformation.

The valid information was that we are not alone, and that the government has made a hitherto secret agreement with short gray humanoids (the "Grays") who say they are from Zeta Reticuli.

Although it was not specifically stated that the Grays were the only E.T. group our government has made contact with, that implication was made. To the extent the implication was made, it was a falsehood.

UFO COVER-UP? . . . LIVE!, hosted by Mike Farrell, implied that Uncle Sam had made a smart deal. However, the truth of the matter is that this deal was the most disastrous mistake, not only in the history of our nation, but in the history of our entire civilization. There were other E.T. groups that we could have made incomparably better arrangements with. Although this scandal is similar in nature to the Iran-Contra deal, it is a tragedy on a scale of such unprecedented magnitude that in comparison Iran-Contra seems like very small change indeed.

The case of contactee Edouard "Billy" Meier in Switzerland, which Mike Farrell stigmatized as "an obvious hoax," is not without its ambiguities, absurdities and contradictions. Nevertheless, the physical evidence is so strong that this is one of the best substantiated cases on record. Dr. James Deardorff has speculated that the E.T.s may be making deliberate use of absurdity as a form of strategic camouflage, in order to ensure gradual rather than sudden realization of their presence. By cloaking their activities in an aura of absurdity, they repel serious investigation and make people hesitate to endorse the reality of the phenomena, keeping it all borderline and marginal, which distracts human attention from their presence.

If this is the game that is going on, the E.T.s may be feeding Meier a mixture of truth and falsehood, which he relays to the public in the sincere belief that it is all true.

For example, Meier believes himself to be the only genuine UFO contactee, an obvious absurdity, because there have been thousands of genuine human-alien contact cases during recent years. He also states that the many thousands of abduction and crop circle incidents reported during recent years were all hoaxes, another obvious absurdity. I concur with Deardorff that Meier is sincere in his beliefs, but that he is being fed information mixed with disinformation.

One of the most curious aspects of the Meier case is the veritable obsession displayed by the goverment's plainclothes media agents (such as William Moore who has publicly admitted his links with government agencies) in over-zealous attempts to discredit the evidence. An all-out media vendetta has been waged against the Meier case that seems totally out of proportion with the investgation of any one single UFO case. Is this because Meier's contact was not with the Zeta Grays but with a rival E.T. group that in appearance is almost indistinguishable from us, and which shares a common ancestry with us, known among researchers as the Blonds or Swedes? This is the same group that was known in antiquity to the Scandinavians as the Aesir, to the Irish as the Tuatha Te Danaan, and by other names in other cultures. One of the modern Soviet cases mentioned on the Mike Farrell program, in which the UFO opened up like a flower, was an encounter with the Blonds, a group with whom I think we could work out a valid alliance.

Dr. Jean Mundy is a Professor Emeritus in Psychology at Long Island University and has been in private practice in psychotherapy and hypnotherapy for over twenty years. She is a member of a long list of professional and honorary societies, and she has published articles on a wide variety of subjects in both the academic and the popular press. During recent years, she has focused her expertise on the subject of UFO phenomena. Dr. Mundy has written the following analysis of the public reaction to the 1988 TV program especially for this book:

The most astonishing UFO TV documentary aired to date, on October 14, 1988, with Mike Farrell as the host, had all the ingredients of a

blockbuster. Note just some of the cast of characters: 1) A Russian scientist, revealing that aliens have landed in Russia
military personnel. 2) Two CIA agents, indentities
and contacted their disguised, revealing

that extra-terrestrial aliens are now the "guests of the U.S. Government." 3) About a hundred residents of Gulf Breeze, Florida, who have witnessed and photographed the
home town. 4) Abductees telling their
extensive UFO activity in their own stories under

sightings
hypnosis. 5) they reported

Expert witnesses from the military saying that while in service 'disappeared' from the records. ing that abductees she has treated were sane 6) A psychiatrist reportand suffering from trauma as a result of their contact with aliens. 7) Evidence by investigators of crashed UFO
tigated hundreds
sites. 8) Testimony from Budd Hopkins, who has invesof abductee cases for over 12 years, that genetic

experiments are being performed by aliens on humans on a large scale. 9) Other witnesses, each expert in his/her own field, testifying to the validity of photographic or other tangible documentation of UFOs. 10) Paintings of aliens drawn by artists from the testimony of witnesses.

Surely, even by Hollywood standards, here are all the ingredients of a box-office hit. Was it a hit? Well, during the two-hour show, 75,000 viewers did pay one dollar each to have their phone-in vote about their belief in human-alien contact recorded. What other signs of success made the front page? Not a one! The show was a flop in terms of arousing public interest. How can this be? How could such a carefully concocted combination of ingredients, culminating in the most newsworthy disclosure in history, not elicit a bang, nor even a whimper?

I played a videotape of the show to my adult education class on alienhuman contact. I watched the reactions of my class members. Thanks to the review/playback capability, I was able to conduct some experiments.

The adult students who signed up for this course were believers in the possiblity of human-alien contact. Some even had personal experience of contact, yet after the screening they were more doubtful than before! I then recognized that UFO COVER-UP? . . . LIVE! made brilliant use of the best propaganda techniques. If you have a tape of the show, watch it again, and listen carefully to the soundtrack. Look at the painted backdrops and, most important, look at Mike Farrell's reactions.

You will see and hear some interesting contradictions. The astute viewer cannot dismiss these contradictions as sloppy production. The production had a huge budget and was planned many months in advance. In fact, Budd Hopkins reported to me that each witness was interviewed at length before the show, then certain words of that interview were selected to be used. The words were put on cue cards, and on the nights of the show, the witnesses were allowed to say only what was on the cards. UFO COVERUP? . . . LIVE! was carefully rehearsed. Reading from cue cards, unless one is experienced in doing so, gives words a stilted sound that many listeners take as phony. Score one for not believing the witnesses.

Score two: When words are spoken over background music, the music makes an unconscious impression that flavors the emotional impact of the words. For example, the relentless "approach," louder and louder in intensity, of the orchestration of the Jaws soundtrack as the shark nears its victim builds up a feeling of dread even before any action takes place. The background music for UFO COVER-UP? . . . LIVE! is light, pleasant dance music. While the Russian is speaking of terrifying abductions, the music is a rousing polka!

Score three: When the Russian says, "The aliens communicated with the terrified soldiers by mental telepathy," Mike Farrell responds, "Oh, they used music, just like in the movie Close Encounters." We depend very much on the reaction of others to set our own reaction. Obviously, if someone tells you a story and they are laughing, you think the story is funny. If they are in a panic state while telling it to you, you think of it as tragic. Throughout of the entire show, Mike Farrell reacted to all the UFO information with puzzlement, but in an amused and light-hearted manner. So, for the most part, the audience did too.

Score four: Through the skillful but unobtrusive use of another media technique, the painted backdrop against which the alien Grays are portrayed is a bright sunny room overlooking a garden! Nothing to take seriously there, certainly nothing to worry about.

Also the depictions of the Grays were idealized and did not conform to witness descriptions, giving the impression of benign Disneyesque animated characters.

Score five: Another powerful media technique is to trivialize something important by focusing on a tiny detail. For example, telling the audience that the aliens "prefer strawberry ice cream" reduces these mysterious life forms to a childish format.

Score six: We are so accustomed to Hollywood movies that we are entertained by a "historical" film, but never for a moment truly believe that the "action" taking place on the screen is real. We know it is rehearsed and played by actors. When Mike Farell puts the UFO reports in the same category as the movie Close Encounters, the audience automatically thinks of the TV documentary UFO COVER-UP? ... LIVE! as just another Hollywood movie. No one writes a letter to the editor of their local newspaper or phones their Congressman to demand action about a crime committed in a Hollywood movie.

There is more. One of the women presented in the documentary who has been abducted by aliens is an acquaintance of mine. Her entire life has been affected by her terrifying alien contact. The one and only comment highlighted on the cue card for her to use on the supposedly "LIVE!" Mike Farrell show was, "Oh, he's so ugly." When my students heard this, they giggled! They took it to be comical.

Neither my students nor the majority of the viewing audience took the UFO COVER-UP! . . . LIVE! program seriously. That is why there was no audience response. One of my students said he thought, "The man portraying the Russian couldn't have been a real Russian, because he spoke English too well." No doubt he was trying to account for why the show did not have the ring of truth to it.

The question remains: were the producers of the show, whoever they really are, pleased that their show was a "flop," in that few viewers took the reality of alien-human contact (or invasion) seriously? Or were they disappointed by the lack of audience response? What, indeed, was the real purpose of this carefully staged show?