---

---

          

---

---

Pentagon Review Finds No Evidence of Alien Cover-Up


Today's Paper

Politics |Pentagon Review Finds No Evidence of Alien Cover-Up https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/08/us/politics/pentagon-ufo-alien-review.html

But the new report suggests that the public's belief that the government is hiding what it knows will probably continue.

A new document is the most sweeping rebuttal the Pentagon has issued in recent years to counter claims it has information on extraterrestrial visits or technology.Credit...Haiyun Jiang /The New York Times

By Julian E. Barnes

Reporting from Washington

March 8, 2024

In the 1960s, secret test flights of advanced government spy planes generated U.F.O. sightings. More recently, government and commercial drones, new kinds of satellites and errant weather balloons have led to a renaissance in unusual observations.

But, according to a new report , none of these sightings were of alien spacecraft.

The new congressionally mandated Pentagon report found no evidence that the government was covering up knowledge of extraterrestrial technology and said there was no evidence that any U.F.O. sightings represented alien visitation to Earth.

The 63-page document is the most sweeping rebuttal the Pentagon has issued in recent years to counter claims that it has information on extraterrestrial visits or technology. But amid widespread distrust of the government, the report is unlikely to calm a growing obsession with aliens.

Maj. Gen. Patrick Ryder, a Defense Department spokesman, said the Pentagon approached the report with an open mind and no preconceived notions, but simply found no evidence to back up claims of secret programs, hidden alien technology or anything else extraterrestrial.

"All investigative efforts, at all levels of classification, concluded that most sightings were ordinary objects and phenomena and the result of misidentification," General Ryder said in a statement.

While many reports of what the government now calls Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena remain unsolved, the new document states plainly there is nothing to see. The Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office concluded that if better quality data were available, "most of these cases also could be identified and resolved as ordinary objects or phenomena."

Because of that missing data, Pentagon officials in the past have often been reluctant to speak clearly about various incidents, saying they lack information to draw a conclusion. But in the absence of conclusions, conspiracy theories have flourished, even as scientists and independent investigators made the case that optical illusions, weather phenomena, scientific balloons or drones were reasonable causes of nearly all of the unexplained incidents.

The report also challenges the accounts of whistle-blowers and former government officials who have said the United States is hiding evidence of aliens or extraterrestrial material from the public.

The Pentagon has, over time, tried to chip away at such claims. Officials have testified to Congress that the government has no extraterrestrial materials - much less a spaceship - in its possession. The Pentagon and NASA have used basic trigonometry to show why publicized military videos do not show anything extraordinary or alien.

The report will not be the last word. Congress has mandated a second report by the Pentagon and passed a measure last year ordering the National Archives to declassify more records. NASA and U.S. intelligence agencies are looking at ways to collect more comprehensive data about unexplained sightings.

But none of those efforts are likely to deviate from the broad conclusions stated on Friday.

Progress in debunking misinformation about U.F.O.s has been slowed by various changes in the task force looking into the matter. Congress has charged the Pentagon's current group, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or AARO, with a historical review of the evidence.

The office has not found "any empirical evidence" that reported sightings represent "off world technology" or any classified program that had not been reported to Congress, the report concludes.

Nevertheless the public is unlikely to be swayed. Many people dismiss the government's claims that nothing interesting is going on in Pentagon videos that appear to show strange objects, citing accounts by Navy pilots that they observed objects whose movements cannot be easily explained.

The new report notes that in the past, particularly in the 1950s, there was interest in U.F.O.s, but today the attention on unexplained sightings is greater than ever before.

The Pentagon, treading gently and writing with precise language, concludes that declining public trust in government and the speed in which misinformation now spreads has made it more difficult to rebut claims of extraterrestrial visits.

Citing a 2021 Gallup poll, the Pentagon said that exposure to the topic through "traditional and social media has increased the number of Americans who believe U.F.O. sightings are extraterrestrial in origins."

"Aside from hoaxes and forgeries, misinformation and disinformation is more prevalent and easier to disseminate now than ever before, especially with today's advanced photo, video and computer-generated imagery tools," the report found. "Internet search and content recommendation algorithms serve to reinforce individuals' preconceptions and confirmation biases just as much as to help educate and inform."

The report notes that in the 1950s, many U.F.O. reports were driven by public sightings or classified government programs . The report lists government programs including the Manhattan Project and the secret development of the Air Force's stealth drone, the RQ-170, that may have contributed to increased reports of unidentified objects or phenomena.

There are former government officials who firmly believe the United States has information about aliens or have heard reports about secret programs to study extraterrestrial technology. Those former officials have been star witnesses at congressional hearings .

As part of the investigation, the Pentagon interviewed people who made claims to Congress that they had direct knowledge about a government coverup and others who were said to have corroborating information.

An overview of their accounts makes plain that most of the reports of alien technology are, at best, secondhand. And none of the firsthand reports were corroborated by other witnesses.

Nevertheless, the Pentagon investigated the claims and, so far, found nothing to back them up. In contrast, it collected on-the-record refutations from other witnesses. The report said the office would continue to investigate and report further claims in a second volume.

The Pentagon also looked into classified and sensitive government programs that whistle-blowers have suggested were involved with examining captured alien spacecraft.

The Pentagon concluded that while "many of these programs represent authentic, current and former sensitive, national security programs," none of them were involved with capturing or reverse engineering extraterrestrial technology.

Julian E. Barnes covers the U.S. intelligence agencies and international security matters for The Times. He has written about security issues for more than two decades.More about Julian E. Barnes

A version of this article appears in print on , Section A, Page 17 of the New York edition with the headline: Pentagon Review Rejects Claims of Alien Cover-Up. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe 203



1952 UFO flap


2Sightings over Washington <#Sightings_over_Washington> Toggle Sightings over Washington subsection o 2.1Night of July 19 <#Night_of_July_19> o 2.2Publicity and Air Force reaction <#Publicity_and_Air_Force_reaction> o 2.3Night of July 26 <#Night_of_July_26> * 3White House concern and CIA interest <#White_House_concern_and_CIA_interest> * 4Air Force explanation <#Air_Force_explanation> Toggle Air Force explanation subsection o 4.1Criticisms <#Criticisms> * 5The Robertson Panel <#The_Robertson_Panel> * 6In popular culture <#In_popular_culture> * 7References <#References> Toggle References subsection o 7.1Notes <#Notes> o 7.2Sources <#Sources> * 8External links <#External_links>

Toggle the table of contents

1952 Washington, D.C., UFO incident

* What links here * Related changes * Upload file * Special pages * Permanent link * Page information * Cite this page * Get shortened URL * Download QR code * Wikidata item

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 1952 UFO incident occurring in Washington, DC Washington National Airport terminal in 1944.

UFOs and ufology Photograph from purported UFO sighting in Passaic, New Jersey Notable sightings and hoaxes

* Kenneth Arnold sighting * 1947 wave * Roswell * Mantell crash * Chiles-Whitted * Gorman dogfight * McMinnville photos * Mariana film * 1952 flap * Sightings in outer space * Flatwoods monster * Barney and Betty Hill * Travis Walton * Rendlesham Forest * Belgian wave * Alien autopsy hoax * Phoenix Lights * Pentagon UFO videos

* Government investigations

* Operação Prato - Brazil * Project Magnet - Canada * GEIPAN - France * Institute 22 - Soviet Union * Flying Saucer Working Party - UK * Project Condign - UK * History of government investigations - US * All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office - US * NASA's UAP independent study team - US * Condon Committee - US * Project Blue Book - US

Conspiracy theories

* Area 51 * Bob Lazar * Majestic 12 * Men in black * Serpo

Religions

* Aetherius Society * Church of the SubGenius * Heaven's Gate * Nation of Islam * Raëlism * Scientology * Unarius Academy of Science

Lists of organizations, sightings, studies, etc.

* UFO organizations * Reported UFO sightings * Sightings by country * Investigations of UFOs by governments * Identification studies of UFOs * Ufologists * Alleged extraterrestrial beings

* v * t * e

From July 12 to 29, 1952, a series of unidentified flying object (UFO) sightings were reported in Washington, D.C. , and later became known as the *Washington flap*, the *Washington National Airport Sightings*, or the *Invasion of Washington*.^[1] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199473-1> The most publicized sightings took place on consecutive weekends, July 19---20 and July 26---27. UFO historian Curtis Peebles called the incident "the climax of the 1952 (UFO) flap" - "Never before or after did Project Blue Book and the Air Force undergo such a tidal wave of (UFO) reports." ^[2] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199478-2>

1952 UFO flap ]

Reports peaked in late July

The 1952 UFO flap was a unprecedented rash of media attention to unidentified flying object reports during in the summer of 1952 that culminated with reports of sightings over Washington, D.C.^[3] <#cite_note-3> In the four years prior, the US Air Force had chronicled a total of 615 UFO reports; During the 1952 flap, they received over 717 new reports.^[4] <#cite_note-4> In the popular press, with over 16,000 items about flying saucers were published during the flap across 150 newspapers.^[5] <#cite_note-5> ^[6] <#cite_note-6>

Ruppelt recalled: "During a six-month period in 1952... 148 of the nation's leading newspapers carried a total of over 16,000 items about flying saucers."^[7] <#cite_note-7>

On April 3, the Associated Press reported on an upcoming story in /Life/ magazine that would reveal the Air Force was taking a serious interest in Flying Saucers.^[8] <#cite_note-8> The June edition of /Look/ magazine featured a story where astrophysicist Donald Howard Menzel proposed flying saucers were optical mirages created by temperature inversions .^[9] <#cite_note-9> ^[10] <#cite_note-10> American papers covered similar statements from French astronomer Ernest Esclangon who explained that saucer reports over Europe could not be supersonic craft because no sonic booms were reported. ^[11] <#cite_note-11>

On April 7, /Life/ magazine published the Flying Saucer article under the title "Have We Visitors from Space?", becoming the most reputable outlet to seriously consider the possibility that flying saucer reports might be caused by extra-terrestrial spaceships.^[12] <#cite_note-12> ^[13] <#cite_note-13> The article detailed ten incidents, including the Lubbock Lights , green fireballs over Los Alamos, the LaPaz sightings , the Tombaugh sighting over Las Cruces , and others.

Sightings over Washington ]

At the height of the UFO flap, there were UFOs reported at the nation's capital on two consecutive Saturday nights.

Night of July 19

At 11:40 p.m. on Saturday, July 19, 1952, Edward Nugent, an air traffic controller at Washington National Airport spotted seven objects on his radar .^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> The objects were located 15 miles (24 km) south-southwest of the city; no known aircraft were in the area, and the objects were not following any established flight paths. Nugent's superior, Harry Barnes, a senior air-traffic controller at the airport, watched the objects on Nugent's radarscope. He later wrote:

We knew immediately that a very strange situation existed . . . their movements were completely radical compared to those of ordinary aircraft.^[15] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEClark1998653-15>

Barnes had two controllers check Nugent's radar; they found that it was working normally. Barnes then called National Airport's radar-equipped control tower; the controllers there, Howard Cocklin and Joe Zacko, said that they also had unidentified blips on their radar screen, and saw a hovering "bright light" in the sky, which departed with incredible speed.^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> Cocklin asked Zacko, "Did you see that? What the hell was that?"^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14>

At this point, other objects appeared in all sectors of the radarscope; when they moved over the White House and the United States Capitol , Barnes called Andrews Air Force Base , located 10 miles from National Airport. Although Andrews reported that they had no unusual objects on their radar, an airman soon called the base's control tower to report the sighting of a strange object. Airman William Brady, who was in the tower, then saw an "object which appeared to be like an orange ball of fire, trailing a tail . . . [it was] unlike anything I had ever seen before."^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> ^[16] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEClark1998654-16> As Brady tried to alert the other personnel in the tower, the strange object "took off at an unbelievable speed.^[16] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEClark1998654-16>

On one of National Airport's runways , S.C. Pierman, a Capital Airlines pilot, was waiting in the cockpit of his DC-4 for permission to take off. After spotting what he believed to be a meteor , he was told that the control tower's radar had detected unknown objects closing in on his position. Pierman observed six objects - "white, tailless, fast-moving lights" - over a 14-minute period.^[17] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEClark1998655-17> ^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> Pierman was in radio contact with Barnes during his sighting, and Barnes later related that "each sighting coincided with a pip we could see near his plane. When he reported that the light streaked off at a high speed, it disappeared on our scope."^[18] <#cite_note-washingtoncitypaper.com-18>

Meanwhile, at Andrews Air Force Base, the control tower personnel were tracking on radar what some thought to be unknown objects, but others suspected, and in one instance were able to prove, were simply stars and meteors.^[19] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199474-19> However, Staff Sgt. Charles Davenport observed an orange-red light to the south; the light "would appear to stand still, then make an abrupt change in direction and altitude . . . this happened several times."^[18] <#cite_note-washingtoncitypaper.com-18> At one point both radar centers at National Airport and the radar at Andrews Air Force Base were tracking an object hovering over a radio beacon. The object vanished in all three radar centers at the same time.^[20] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955160-20>

At 3 a.m., shortly before two United States Air Force F-94 Starfire jet fighters from New Castle Air Force Base in Delaware arrived over Washington, all of the objects vanished from the radar at National Airport. However, when the jets ran low on fuel and left, the objects returned, which convinced Barnes that "the UFOs were monitoring radio traffic and behaving accordingly."^[18] <#cite_note-washingtoncitypaper.com-18> The objects were last detected by radar at 5:30 a.m.

Publicity and Air Force reaction ]

The sightings of July 19---20, 1952, made front-page headlines in newspapers around the nation. A typical example was the headline from the /Cedar Rapids Gazette / in Iowa. It read "SAUCERS SWARM OVER CAPITAL" in large black type.^[21] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMichaels199722-21> By coincidence, USAF Captain Edward J. Ruppelt , the supervisor of the Air Force's Project Blue Book investigation into UFO sightings, was in Washington at the time. However, he did not learn about the sightings until Monday, July 21, when he read the headlines in a Washington-area newspaper.^[22] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955210-22> After talking with intelligence officers at the Pentagon about the sightings, Ruppelt spent several hours trying to obtain a staff car so he could travel around Washington to investigate the sightings, but was refused as only generals and senior colonels could use staff cars. He was told that he could rent a taxicab with his own money; by this point Ruppelt was so frustrated that he left Washington and flew back to Blue Book's headquarters at Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, Ohio.^[23] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955162-23> Upon returning to Dayton, Ruppelt spoke with an Air Force radar specialist, Captain Roy James, who felt that unusual weather conditions could have caused the unknown radar targets.^[24] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955163-24>

Night of July 26 ]

At 8:15 p.m. on Saturday, July 26, 1952, a pilot and stewardess on a National Airlines flight into Washington observed some lights above their plane. Within minutes, both radar centers at National Airport, and the radar at Andrews AFB, were tracking more unknown objects.^[25] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199475---76-25> USAF master sergeant Charles E. Cummings visually observed the objects at Andrews, he later said that "these lights did not have the characteristics of shooting stars. There was [sic] no trails . . . they traveled faster than any shooting star I have ever seen."^[18] <#cite_note-washingtoncitypaper.com-18>

Meanwhile, Albert M. Chop, the press spokesman for Project Blue Book , arrived at National Airport and, due to security concerns, denied several reporters' requests to photograph the radar screens. He then joined the radar center personnel.^[26] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955164-26> By this time (9:30 p.m.) the radar center was detecting unknown objects in every sector. At times the objects traveled slowly; at other times they reversed direction and moved across the radarscope at speeds calculated at up to 7,000 mph (11,250 km/h).^[27] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955159-27> At 11:30 p.m., two U.S. Air Force F-94 Starfire jet fighters from New Castle Air Force Base in Delaware arrived over Washington. Captain John McHugo, the flight leader, was vectored towards the radar blips but saw nothing, despite repeated attempts.^[28] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199476-28> However, his wingman, Lieutenant William Patterson, did see four white "glows" and chased them.^[29] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEClark1998659-29> ^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> He told investigators that "I tried to make contact with the bogies below 1,000 feet," and that "I was at my maximum speed but...I ceased chasing them because I saw no chance of overtaking them."^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> According to Albert Chop, when ground control asked Patterson "if he saw anything", Patterson replied "'I see them now and they're all around me. What should I do?'...And nobody answered, because we didn't know what to tell him."^[18] <#cite_note-washingtoncitypaper.com-18>

After midnight on July 27, USAF Major Dewey Fournet, Project Blue Book's liaison at the Pentagon, and Lt. John Holcomb, a United States Navy radar specialist, arrived at the radar center at National Airport.^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> During the night, Lieutenant Holcomb received a call from the Washington National Weather Station. They told him that a slight temperature inversion was present over the city, but Holcomb felt that the inversion was not "nearly strong enough to explain the 'good and solid' returns" on the radar scopes.^[28] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199476-28> Fournet relayed that all those present in the radar room were convinced that the targets were most likely caused by solid metallic objects. There had been weather targets on the scope too, he said, but this was a common occurrence and the controllers "were paying no attention to them".^[30] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955166-30> Two more F-94s from New Castle Air Force Base were scrambled during the night. One pilot saw nothing unusual; the other pilot saw a white light which "vanished" when he moved towards it.^[24] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955163-24> Civilian aircraft also reported glowing objects that corresponded to radar blips seen by Andrews radar operators.^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14> As on July 20, the sightings and unknown radar returns ended at sunrise.^[31] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955165-31>

White House concern and CIA interest ]

The sightings of July 26---27 also made front-page headlines, and led President Harry Truman to have his air force aide call Ruppelt and ask for an explanation of the sightings and unknown radar returns. Truman listened to the conversation between the two men on a separate phone, but did not ask questions himself.^[32] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199477-32> Ruppelt, remembering the conversation he had with Captain James, told the president's assistant that the sightings might have been caused by a temperature inversion, in which a layer of warm, moist air covers a layer of cool, dry air closer to the ground. This condition can cause radar signals to bend and give false returns. However, Ruppelt had not yet interviewed any of the witnesses or conducted a formal investigation.^[21] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEMichaels199722-21>

CIA historian Gerald Haines, in his 1997 history of the CIA's involvement with UFOs, also mentions Truman's concern. "A massive buildup of sightings over the United States in 1952, especially in July, alarmed the Truman administration. On 19 and 20 July, radar scopes at Washington National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base tracked mysterious blips. On 27 July, the blips reappeared."^[33] <#cite_note-http://www.cia.gov-33> The CIA would react to the 1952 wave of UFO reports by "forming a special study group within the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) and Office of Current Intelligence (OCI) to review the situation. Edward Tauss reported for the group that most UFO sightings could be easily explained. Nonetheless, he recommended that the Agency continue monitoring the problem."^[33] <#cite_note-http://www.cia.gov-33> The CIA's concern with the issue would lead to the creation, in January 1953, of the Robertson Panel .^[33] <#cite_note-http://www.cia.gov-33>

Air Force explanation ]

Maj. Gen. John A. Samford's Statement on Flying Saucers

Air Force Major Generals John Samford , USAF Director of Intelligence, and Roger M. Ramey , USAF Director of Operations, held a well-attended press conference at the Pentagon on July 29, 1952. In his opening comments, he noted that, out of the hundreds of UFO reports in recent years investigated by the Air Force, there was "a certain percentage of this volume of reports that have been made by credible observers of relatively incredible things" but that none of them posed any national security threat.^[34] <#cite_note-34> At the event, Samford stated that the visual sightings over Washington could be explained as misidentified aerial phenomena such as stars or meteors, and unknown radar targets could be explained by temperature inversion, which was present in the air over Washington on both nights the radar returns were reported. In addition, Samford stated that the unknown radar contacts were not caused by solid material objects, and therefore posed no threat to national security. In response to a question as to whether the Air Force had recorded similar UFO radar contacts prior to the Washington incident, Samford said that there had been "hundreds" of such contacts where Air Force fighter interceptions had taken place, but stated that they were all "fruitless".^[35] <#cite_note-35> It was the largest Pentagon press conference since World War II .^[36] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199480-36> Press stories called Samford and Ramey the Air Force's two top UFO experts.^[37] <#cite_note-37>

Among the witnesses who supported Samford's explanation was the crew of a B-25 bomber, which had been flying over Washington during the sightings of July 26---27. The bomber was vectored several times by National Airport over unknown targets on the airport's radarscopes, yet the crew could see nothing unusual. Finally, as a crew member related, "the radar had a target which turned out to be the Wilson Lines steamboat trip to Mount Vernon ... the radar was sure as hell picking up the steamboat."^[38] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955170-38> Air Force Captain Harold May was in the radar center at Andrews AFB during the sightings of July 19---20. Upon hearing that National Airport's radar had picked up an unknown object heading in his direction, May stepped outside and saw "a light that was changing from red to orange to green to red again...at times it dipped suddenly and appeared to lose altitude." However, May eventually concluded that he was simply seeing a star that was distorted by the atmosphere, and that its "movement" was an illusion.^[39] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199462-39> At 3 a.m. on July 27, an Eastern Airlines flight over Washington was told that an unknown object was in its vicinity; the crew could see nothing unusual. When they were told that the object had moved directly behind their plane, they began a sharp turn to try to see the object, but were told by National Airport's radar center that the object had "disappeared" when they began their turn.

At the request of the Air Force, the CAA 's Technical Development and Evaluation Center did an analysis of the radar sightings. Their conclusion was that "a temperature inversion had been indicated in almost every instance when the unidentified radar targets or visual objects had been reported."^[40] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199466-40> Project Blue Book would eventually label the unknown Washington radar blips as false images caused by temperature inversion, and the visual sightings as misidentified meteors, stars, and city lights.^[41] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199479-41> In later years two prominent UFO skeptics, Donald Menzel , an astronomer at Harvard University , and Philip Klass , a senior editor for /Aviation Week/ magazine, would also argue in favor of the temperature inversion/mirage hypothesis.^[42] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles1994360-42> In 2002 Klass told a reporter that "radar technology in 1952 wasn't sophisticated enough to filter out many ordinary objects, such as flocks of birds, weather balloons, or temperature inversions."^[18] <#cite_note-washingtoncitypaper.com-18> The reporter added that "UFO proponents argue that even then seasoned controllers could differentiate between spurious targets and solid, metallic objects. Klass disagrees. It may be that 'we had two dumb controllers at National Airport on those nights'...[Klass] added that the introduction of digital filters in the 1970s led to a steep decline in UFO sightings on radar."^[18] <#cite_note-washingtoncitypaper.com-18>

Criticisms ]

In his book, /The Report On Unidentified Flying Objects /, author Edward J. Ruppelt wrote that radar and control tower personnel he spoke to, as well as some Air Force officers, disagreed with the Air Force's explanation.^[38] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTERuppelt1955170-38>

Michael Wertheimer , a researcher for the government-funded Condon Report , investigated the case in 1966, and stated that radar witnesses still disputed the Air Force explanation.^[43] <#cite_note-43>

Former radar controller Howard Cocklin told the /Washington Post/ in 2002 that he was still convinced that he saw an object, stating that "I saw it on the [radar] screen and out the window" over Washington National Airport."^[14] <#cite_note-washingtonpost.com-14>

The Robertson Panel ]

The extremely high numbers of UFO reports in 1952 disturbed both the Air Force and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Both groups felt that an enemy nation could deliberately flood the U.S. with false UFO reports, causing mass panic and allowing them to launch a sneak attack. On September 24, 1952, the CIA's Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) sent a memorandum to Walter B. Smith , the CIA's Director. The memo stated that "the flying saucer situation . . . [has] national security implications . . . [in] the public concern with the phenomena . . . lies the potential for the touching-off of mass hysteria and panic."^[41] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles199479-41> The result of this memorandum was the creation in January 1953 of the Robertson Panel . Howard P. Robertson , a physicist , chaired the panel, which consisted of prominent scientists and which spent four days examining the "best" UFO cases collected by Project Blue Book. The panel dismissed nearly all of the UFO cases it examined as not representing anything unusual or threatening to national security. In the panel's controversial estimate, the Air Force and Project Blue Book needed to spend less time analyzing and studying UFO reports and more time publicly debunking them. The panel recommended that the Air Force and Project Blue Book should take steps to "strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired."^[44] <#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPeebles1994102-44> Following the panel's recommendation, Project Blue Book would rarely publicize any UFO case that it had not labeled as "solved"; unsolved cases were rarely mentioned by the Air Force.



President Eisenhower signs "In God We Trust" into law


There's a Legend That President Eisenhower Really Met Aliens - but Is It True?

Jennifer Tisdale - Author By Jennifer Tisdale

Oct. 7 2021, Published 9:09 a.m. ET

Dwight D. Eisenhower Source: Getty Images

Ryan Murphy, the creator of /American Horror Story/ , has always been a bit of a maestro when it comes to taking mysteries from history and weaving his own supernatural theories into them. We first got a taste of it when The Black Dahlia murder was shown in the /Murder House/ in Season 1.

We watched the disappearance of The Roanoke Colony in 1585 be reduced to the plot of vengeful ghosts. And in /AHS: Death Valley/, we're left wondering did Dwight D. Eisenhower meet aliens ?

Neil McDonough as Dwight Eisenhower in American Horror Story Source: FX

Did Eisenhower really meet aliens?

This is an incredible urban legend that has been kicking around since the early '50s.///American Horror Story: Death Valley/ //starts off with a fictionalized version of the supposed encounter.

In Feb. 1954, President Eisenhower was vacationing in Palm Springs, Calif. when he abruptly disappeared. The press, not knowing what was going on, mistakenly sent out a bulletin stating, "Eisenhower died tonight of a heart attack in Palm Springs." It was retracted.

There are two theories as to where President Eisenhower went. The first comes from Eisenhower's press secretary at the time, James Hagerty, who claimed the president chipped a porcelain cap while eating what we assume was the world's toughest chicken wing. The second is that he was called away to meet aliens.

AHS: Death Valley Source: FX

A few months after this alleged alien encounter, a self-proclaimed mystic said he was at Edwards Air Force base that night and saw the president with both flying saucers and aliens. This story even made its way to /The National Enquirer/ where all the best alien media lives.

Speaking with /The Washington Post/ about this incident for its 50th anniversary, Michael Salla, a former American University professor said that "there was telepathic communication" between Eisenhower and the aliens.

He went on to refer to the aliens by a nickname regularly used in UFO circles: Nordics. They are called this because they, apparently, closely resemble Scandinavian people. Evidently, they were here to share with us their superior technology as well as their spiritual teachings.

The only thing President Eisenhower had to do was to eliminate America's nuclear weapons. Why it's almost as if this is a cover story for a message about the dangers of nuclear arms.

Dwight D. Eisenhower Source: Getty Images

So did Eisenhower's close encounter actually happen? According to Jim Leyerzapf, an archivist at the Eisenhower library, "Not to our knowledge. There's nothing in the archives that indicates that."

In fact, this question is asked so often they had to hire a person who specializes in it. In 2004, that person was Herb Pankratz, who specializes in transportation. And what is a UFO if not another mode of transportation?

Herb is in full support of the dentist story. He attributes this certainty to an article written by dental historian James Mixson titled, "A History of Dwight D. Eisenhower's Oral Health," published in the 1995 issue of the /Bulletin of the History of Dentistry/.

In it, Mixson reports, "On the fateful night of Feb. 20, 1954, Ike chipped the porcelain cap of his 'upper left central incisor,' and it was repaired by Dr. Francis A. Purcell." However, Purcell died in 1974 and there are no records in his office.

The first Greys to meet with Eisenhower were the Nordics who looked like us but only could communicate telepathic much like today . Eisenhower's famous trip to the dentist 😃was Water Reed Airbase to meet the Nordics !

- Nancialejandrina Zavala (@Nancialejandri1) September 29, 2021

Source: Twitter/@Nancialejandri1

Was the incident in 1954 President Eisenhower's first brush with aliens?

A letter from a scientist buried within declassified British Minister of Defense UFO files asked about a confrontation between an RAF aircraft and a UFO during WWII. The author of the letter claims to be the grandson of a man who served with the Royal Air Force.

The grandfather apparently witnessed Winston Churchill discussing what to do about the UFO sighting with General Eisenhower. Evidently, the Prime Minister decided to cover this up because it could incite mass panic.

This story suggests that Eisenhower may have been aware of the possible existence of aliens before that supposed 1954 encounter. And he isn't the only president who has had to deal with whisperings of extraterrestrials.

In Nov. 2011, two petitions were sent to the White House demanding that the U.S. government formally acknowledge aliens have visited Earth. The Obama White House had this to say: "The U.S. government has no evidence that any life exists outside our planet, or that any extraterrestrial presence has contacted or engaged any member of the human race."

When thinking about this question Carl Sagan said it best when he said, "The universe is a pretty big place. If it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space."



President Eisenhower signs "In God We Trust" into law

This Day In History: July 30

July | 30

1956

President Eisenhower signs "In God We Trust" into law

On July 30, 1956, two years after pushing to have the phrase "under God" inserted into the pledge of allegiance, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signs a law officially declaring "In God We Trust" to be the nation's official motto. The law, P.L. 84-140, also mandated that the phrase be printed on all American paper currency. The phrase had been placed on U.S. coins since the Civil War when, according to the historical association of the United States Treasury, religious sentiment reached a peak. Eisenhower's treasury secretary, George Humphrey, had suggested adding the phrase to paper currency as well.

Although some historical accounts claim Eisenhower was raised a Jehovah's Witness, most presidential scholars now believe his family was Mennonite. Either way, Eisenhower abandoned his family's religion before entering the Army, and took the unusual step of being baptized relatively late in his adult life as a Presbyterian. The baptism took place in 1953, barely a year into his first term as president.

Although Eisenhower embraced religion, biographers insist he never intended to force his beliefs on anyone. In fact, the chapel-like structure near where he and his wife Mamie are buried on the grounds of his presidential library is called the "Place of Meditation" and is intentionally inter-denominational. At a Flag Day speech in 1954, he elaborated on his feelings about the place of religion in public life when he discussed why he had wanted to include "under God" in the pledge of allegiance: "In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war."

The first paper money with the phrase "In God We Trust" was not printed until 1957. Since then, religious and secular groups have argued over the appropriateness and constitutionality of a motto that mentions "God," considering the founding fathers dedication to maintaining the separation of church and state.



To Fringe or Not to Fringe, That is the Question


Fact Check: Gold Fringe On A U.S. Flag Does NOT Signal Maritime NOR Martial Law Is In Effect

Fact Check

* Jan 20, 2021 * by: Sarah Thompson

Decoration

Does gold fringe on the American Flag signal imposition of Maritime or Martial Law? No, that's not true: Gold fringe is a decorative option. Although the U.S. Flag code makes no reference to gold fringe, it has been used since 1835. In 1895 the fringe was added to the flag of all regiments of the U.S. Army. The Marine Corps does have a regulation which prohibits gold fringe on a flag. Although there have been conspiracies about what significance this fringe might have, it is nothing more than an optional decoration, or as described by the American Legion, an "honorable enrichment." American Flags with fringe can be displayed indoors or outdoors, can be carried in parades, or displayed in public or private offices or in buildings such as courthouses, churches, and school auditoriums.

The claim originated as a screenshot reproduced in a post (archived here ) where it was published on January 20, 2021. It opened:

"Relax everyone. Trump either signed the insurrection act or we are in martial law. The flag behind Trump this morning had a gold fringe and that signifies martial law. You can look it up. The whole Biden inauguration was not valid and he will be arrested for treason later today."

This is what the post looked like on Facebook at the time of writing:

Facebook screenshot

/(Source: Facebook screenshot taken on Wed Jan 20 22:30:14 2021 UTC)/

There have been conspiracies around the gold fringe on American Flags for years. The U.S. Flag code does not specifically address this gold fringe and this has left room for people to question if it is proper.

The American Legion Website has a page addressing gold fringe on American flags.

*What is the significance of the gold fringe which we see on some United States flags?*

Answer: Records indicate that fringe was first used on the flag as early as 1835. It was not until 1895 that it was officially added to the national flag for all regiments of the Army. For civilian use, fringe is not required as an integral part of the flag, nor can its use be said to constitute an unauthorized addition to the design prescribed by statute. It is considered that fringe is used as an honorable enrichment only. (Military tradition)

The courts have deemed without merit and frivolous, lawsuits that contend that the gold fringe adorning the flag conferred Admiralty/Maritime jurisdiction.

There is also a page dedicated to the top ten myths about the flag :

*The Flag Code prohibits the "fringing" of the flag.* Fringing of the flag is neither approved of nor prohibited by the Flag Code. The American Legion considers that fringe is used as an honorable enrichment to the Flag. Additionally the courts have deemed without merit and frivolous, lawsuits that contend that the gold fringe adorning the flag conferred Admiralty/Maritime jurisdiction.

Images sourced: center: CPAC 2020 Feb. 29, 2020- AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana Upper right: January 11, 2017 LUCAS JACKSON / REUTERS Center right April 24, 2017 AP Photo/Andrew Harnik- in oval office Lower Right: January 6, 2021 Ellipse speech- AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Regardless of the personal opinions and conspiracy theories about this flag code ambiguity, currently flags trimmed with gold fringe are in common use and carry no specific additional meaning. To only focus on the gold fringe trimmed flags which were displayed in the background of President Donald Trump's final videotaped address of January 19, 2021, as if that is a secret message about martial law- is to ignore that there have been gold trimmed flags featured prominently throughout this presidency.

Lead stories debunked a rumor about Donald Trump invoking the Insurrection Act in an article on January 11, 2021.

// DrillMaster// December 19, 2017//Ask DrillMaster , //Commentary , //Drill Teams , //Honor Guard , //Instructional // 5 Comments

I originally wrote this in December of 2017. This update, December of 2023, includes links to other articles to help fully explain the issues.

Please read about the difference between a flag and a color .

According to the US Army, fringe is an honorable enrichment only, not an integral part of the color. As it is attached on the edge, it does not "deface" the color which therefore remains the Stars and Stripes of the US. Originally, fringe was used to create a static charge that actually helped keep the flag clean.

See also: All About The Flag . and especially, Flag, Fringe and Finial Theor y.

EO 10834

There are many posts that posit the theory that the fringe represents martial or admiralty law. However there is no law, decree, order or other legally enforceable proclamation that mentions the fringe, either to prescribe or proscribe its use. Some quote Executive Order 10834 (under President Eisenhower) however this is a public document available in full on the Internet and a review will show no mention of a fringe. Click here for the text of Executive Order 10834 (1959) on the make up of the American flag.

Title 4, United States Code, Chapter 1

This is what we call the Flag Code. This section of the US Code governs the flag. There is nothing that says that a civilian or civilian organization may not display a flag with a gold fringe. This does not include veteran organizations whose members are required to follow Army or Marine Corps guidance.

Indoor/Outdoor vs. Outside

Both colors do not have fringe, this is incorrect for the USAF.

*"Fringe is for indoor flags only."* That is a reply I received from an Air Force Base Honor Guard member years ago who received bad training. If what she wrote to me is so, then someone had better tell the Joint Service Color Guard pictured at the top of this post. When a color is mounted on a flagstaff that is to be carried and you are in a military color team, for the Army, Air Force, and Space Force, all the colors better have fringe on them. That is the standard. The same goes for the Marine Corps, Navy, and Coast Guard, except they forbid fringe on the US.

An *indoor/outdoor flag*, has a staff sleeve (pole hem) and is called a color. This hem is a sleeve that fits over the flagstaff. This is the type of color that must have fringe for military color guards.

An**"*outside flag*" (my term) has a header with grommets . This type of flag (not a color) is not attached to a flagstaff to be carried by a color guard, it is attached to clips on a halyard and raised outside on a flagpole.

Service Standards

*Gold fringe can be found on ceremonial flags used indoors and for outdoor ceremonies*. The fringe is considered completely within the guidelines of proper flag etiquette. There is nothing in the *Flag Code* about the fringe being for federal government flags only.

http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/faq.htm

The *Army* (AR 840-10 states all flags carried by Soldiers will have gold-colored fringe) and *Air Force* (AFI 34-1201 states all flags carried by Airmen will have gold-colored fringe) carry fringed colors. This also applies to the *Space Force*. The *Space Force* departmental, organizational, and general officer flags must have silver-colored fringe. This is mandatory and you must request it from the flag company (go to www.colonialflag.com ).

The *Marine Corps*, *Navy,* and *Coast Guard* do not carry an American flag with fringe. MCO 4400.201 Vol 13, states, "The use of fringe on national colors or standards within the Marine Corps is prohibited." This is because the Flag Code states that nothing will be attached to the American flag.

*Marine Corps*, *Navy*, and *Coast Guard* departmental and organizational flags must have gold-colored fringe.

The *Navy* Infantry Battalion Color does not receive fringe even though it is displayed on a flagstaff and carried in a color guard. This flag is not flown on a mast.

What about the cord and tassels?

The gold cord and tassels is not authorized on any flag displayed in the US military.

*Army and Air Force* --- Any cord and tassels is not authorized on any color guard flag.

*Marine Corps* --- Battle Streamers OR a scarlet and gold cord for the USMC fringed color.

*Marine Corps, Navy, and Coast Guard* --- The colors of the cord and tassel for the national color are red, white, and blue.