The Oberg Files
by Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D.
(Agent BlueBird)



In regards to Jim Oberg's startlingly revealing (yet utterly ignored!) recent usenet posting:

Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: OTHER gov't UFO secrets
Date: 26 Apr 1997 14:15:43 GMT

Open letter to CSETI:

I applaud CSETI's efforts to strip away the "government secrets prosecution" barrier to the disclosure of people's stories about UFO experiences and I fully support the call for a government declaration that all legal constraints against disclosure be dissolved. I've always felt that claims of fear of such prosecution as an excuse by people not to "go public" was often merely a gimmick not to have to take responsibility for the authenticity of such stories, since as far as I've been able to tell -- and through OMNI's "Project Open Book" we searched far and wide for examples -- nobody has ever been arrested or charged -- much less convicted and sentenced -- for actually doing so.

But don't stop merely with legalizing disclosure of all -- if any -- government secrets about "real UFOs". I believe there is a far more valuable body of "secrets" that will help understand the decades of UFO phenomena that the world has experienced. This deals with government-related activities which directly or indirectly led to public perceptions that UFOs might be real when they weren't. Sometimes these actions were carefully orchestrated in advance, sometimes they were localized impromptu ad hoc damage- limitation tactics. But from my own experience, they seem to have played a tremendous and widely unappreciated role in inciting and enflaming public interests in UFOs while deflecting public attention from real highly-classified government activities.

I'm referring to situations where government representatives -- officials, military officers, any employees -- used "UFO" as a convenient camouflage for other official classified activities (such as retrieval of crashed aircraft or nuclear weapons or other objects), or used artificial "UFO stories" (in oral, written, photographic, film, etc.) form as "tracers" in studying the function of security safeguards and personnel psychological responses, or used "UFO" as an excuse (either intended or accidental) to cover-up improper, forbidden, or diplomatically delicate activities (such as aviation incidents involving dangerous accidental or deliberate close passes or intercepts of civilian airliners, or overseas excursions of agents on intelligence missions where deflection of local perceptions was useful, or to conceal from the country of origin the possession of foreign military hardware), or played pranks and jokes on intended or accidental targets, or any other activity that the government -- or any part of it -- wanted to keep hidden, knowing that having it thought of as "UFO-related" would consign it to the never-never- land of myth and nuttiness, thus keeping mainstream media attention to a minimum. And it's worked!!

Please include such "UFO secrets" in your list of disclosure demands, and ask that any government personnel involved in the use (or misuse and abuse) of such practices be immune from any government prosecution for the actions which led them to take such measures. Once such immunity is verifiably granted, I have my own list of people who have privately talked to me over the years and who were involved in government activities leading to a number of well-known "UFO cases", which can be released and which can help understand where and how much of today's UFO mythology originated.

This is a serious proposal deserving of serious consideration, and promises immensely fruitful results.

Figuring Brother Jim for the consummate team player, we marvelled amongst ourselves at this unexpected midstream change of strategy and could not help but wonder who birthed the Bright Idea to expose the delicate underbelly of The Dark Lords in such a blatant fashion as this!

So, deciding to shake the tree a tad, we stuffed a copy of Oberg's refreshingly candid letter into both the mouth of The Eschaton (who immediately circulated it on the Hill) and the beak of his Devious Overlord the Pelican then sat back, amused, to watch the cauldron bubble a bit.

Eye of Newt and Tongue of Dan, etc.

Now in that our Fine Metaprogramming Friend, CSETI's Dr. Steve, is currently embroiled in a Holy NWO B'hai Jihad of Galactic Proportion, Brother Daniel was absolutely delighted to encounter such a propitious cache-o-timely-intell, thinking to toss the recent Oberg Missive on the Relatively Holy Fires which are already beginning to brew in certain Secrecy Oversight Hearings out D.C. way.

Alas, The Evil Government hath once again prevailed for a subsequent call to Mr. Oberg revealed not the Righteously Indignant and Noble Seeker of Truth we had hoped, but rather an intimidated and downright terrified individual who had apparently been pushed around a bit by The Bully which calls itself our Deare Uncle Samuel. In fact, Mr. Oberg stated that he did not want his family involved in any of this and that he was now abandoning the field of UFOlogy altogether!

A most interesting turn of events, no?

So where does this leave us? The sp00ks can still hide many of their heinous and insidious black-ops human experimentation projeckts beneath the veil of the Modern Urban Myth which we all lovingly refer to as Club UFOlogy whilst Brother James will have trouble showing his face around these parts without some elaborate form of retraction-flavoured sophistry. Though many of the True Blue UFO Believers will no doubt rejoice over this perceived "victory" as yet another of their Hegelian counterparts bites the dust, we cannot but perceive this as a depressing setback in terms of shedding much needed light into some of the darker recesses of the taxpayer-funded eschatological machine.

::: sigh :::

In any event, for those who suspect something far less extraterrestrial than "rectum-coring reticulan reptoids" from outer space, we have included some related materials which you will no doubt find of great interest:

[dated 1952]
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington 25, D.C.

Office of the Director
Memorandum to: Director, Psychological Strategy Board
Subject: Flying Saucers

I am today transmitting to the National Security Council a proposal (TAB A) in which it is concluded that the problems connected with unidentified flying objects appear to have implications for psychological warfare as well as for intelligence and operations.

The background for this view is presented in some detail in TAB B.

I suggest that we discuss as an early board meeting the possible offensive or defensive utilization of these phenomena for psychological warfare purposes.

Walter B. Smith


[Note: for additional information regarding this controversial document, contact Technology 1999, 3739 8th Ave, Suite One, San Diego, CA 92103-4327, (888) 223-1999 -B:.B:.]

A controversial memorandum from 1953 may shed new light on the UFO phenomenon.
January 9, 1953

cc: B.D. Thomas
H.C. Cross / A.D. Westerman
L.R. Jackson
W.T. Reid
P.J. Rieppal
V.W. Ellsey / R.J. Lund
Extra [handwritten]

Mr. Miles E. Coll
Box 9575
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio

Attention Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt

Dear Mr. Coll:

This letter concerns a preliminary recommendation to ATIC on future methods of handling the problem of unidentified aerial objects. This recommendation is based on our experience to date in analyzing several thousands of reports on this subject. We regard the recommendation as preliminary because our analysis is not yet complete, and we are not able to document it where we feel it should be supported by facts from the analysis.

We are making this recommendation prematurely because of a CIA-sponsored meeting of a scientific panel, meeting in Washington, D.C., January 14, 15, and 16, 1953, to consider the problem of "flying saucers". The CIA-sponsored meeting is being hold subsequent to a meeting of CIA, ATIC, and our representatives held at ATIC on December 12, 1952. At the December 12 meeting our representatives strongly recommended that a scientific panel not be set up until the results of our analysis of the sighting- reports collected by ATIC were available. Since a meeting of the panel is now definitely scheduled we feel that agreement between Project Stork and ATIC should be reached as to what can and what cannot be discussed at the meeting in Washington on January 14-16 concerning our preliminary recommendation to ATIC.

Experience to date on our study of unidentified flying objects shows that there is a distinct lack of reliable data with which to work. Even the best-documented reports are frequently lacking in critical information that makes it impossible to arrive at a possible identification, i.e. even in a well-documented report there is always an element of doubt about the data, either because the observer had no means of getting the required data, or was not prepared to utilize the means at his disposal. Therefore, we recommend that a controlled experiment be set up by which reliable physical data can be obtained. A tentative preliminary plan by which the experiment could be designed and carried out is discussed in the following paragraphs.

Based on our experience so far, it is expected that certain conclusions will be reached as a result of our analysis which will make obvious the need for an effort to obtain reliable data from competent observers using the [...unreadable...] necessary equipment. Until more reliable data are available, no positive answers to the problem will be possible.

We expect that our analysis will show that certain areas in the United States have had an abnormally high number of reported incidents of unidentified flying objects. Assuming that, from our analysis, several definite areas productive of reports can be selected, we recommend that one or two of theses areas be set up as experimental areas. This area, or areas, should have observation posts with complete visual skywatch, with radar and photographic coverage, plus all other instruments necessary or helpful in obtaining positive and reliable data on everything in the air over the area. A very complete record of the weather should also be kept during the time of the experiment. Coverage should be so complete that any object in the air could be tracked, and information as to its altitude, velocity, size, shape, color, time of day, etc. could be recorded. All balloon releases or known balloon paths, aircraft flights, and flights of rockets in the test area should be known to those in charge of the experiment. Many different types of aerial activity should be secretly and purposefully scheduled within the area.

We recognize that this proposed experiment would amount to a large- scale military maneuver, or operation, and that it would require extensive preparation and fine coordination, plus maximum security. Although it would be a major operation, and expensive, there are many extra benefits to be derived besides the data on unidentified aerial objects.

The question of just what would be accomplished by the proposed experiment occurs. Just how could the problem of these unidentified objects be solved? From this test area, during the time of the experiment, it can be assumed that there would be a steady flow of reports from ordinary civilian observers, in addition to those by military or other official observers. It should be possible by such a controlled experiment to prove the identity of all objects reported, or to determine positively that there were objects present of unknown identity. Any hoaxes under a set-up such as this could almost certainly be exposed, perhaps not publicly, but at least to the military.

In addition, by having resulting data from the controlled experiment, reports for the last five years could be re-evaluated, in the light of similar but positive information. This should make possible reasonably certain conclusions concerning the importance of the problem of "flying saucers".

Results of an experiment such as described could assist the Air Force to determine how much attention to pay to future situations when, as in the past summer, there were thousands of sightings reported. In the future, then, the Air Force should be able to make positive statements, reassuring to the public, and to the effect that everything is well under control.

Very truly yours,


H.C. Cross

[following is a related response from Jacques Vallee]

Excerpt from:
Encounter Chronicles, Journal of Scientific Intelligence
Issue #16, Vol. 4, No. 4, July-August 1996
Dr. Rod Lewis, Editor/Publisher
10878 Westheimer #293, Houston, TX 77042
(713) 558-5342 (BBS)
(713) 558-1630 (Voicemail)

27 April 1993

Barry Greenwood

Dear Barry:

Thank you for sending me your thoughtful commentary about the Pentacle document. I do agree with you on one point: the significance of the memo comes, in part, from what it does not say. In particular, it makes no reference to any recovered UFO hardware, at Roswell or elsewhere, or to alien bodies. The greater significance of what it does say will slowly emerge in coming years as the overall implications come to light. Let me draw your attention to three specific points.

Project Twinkle and other observational efforts by the military, which you mention in an effort to show that Pentacle was only dusting off an old idea, were purely passive projects. In sharp contrast the Pentacle proposal goes far beyond anything mentioned before. It daringly states that "many different types of aerial activity should be SECRETLY AND PURPOSEFULLY SCHEDULED WITHIN THE AREA (my emphasis)." It is difficult to be more clear. We are not talking simply about setting up observing stations and cameras. We are talking about large-scale, covert simulation of UFO waves under military control.

The greatest implication, which is perhaps not obvious on first reading but which amounts to a scandal of major proportion in the eyes of any scientist, has to do with the outright manipulation of the Robertson panel. Here is a special meeting of the five most eminent scientists in the land, assembled by the government to discuss a matter of national security. Not only are they not made aware of all the data, but another group has already decided "what can and cannot be discussed (Pentacle's own words!)" when they meet. Dr. Hynek categorically stated to me that the panel was not briefed about the Pentacle proposals.

Revelation of this document may seem irrelevant to Just Cause, but its explosive nature wasn't lost on Battelle. As I noted in Forbidden Science, and as Fred Beckman vividly recalls to this day, the Project Stork team reacted with fury when Hynek went back to Battelle in 1967, demanding to know the truth. The man I have called Pentacle snatched his notes away and told him in no uncertain terms that the contents of the memo were not to be discussed, under any circumstances.

[In Forbidden Science, Vallee notes in June of 1967 "What these people were recommending was nothing less than a carefully calibrated and monitored simulation of an entire UFO wave" and asks "For whom did 'Pentacle' work? Did the proposed experiment take place? Who were these people who calmly sat around the table with the CIA and the Air Force and who, many years before us, understood the need to acquire second-generation data?" And of the insights of his friend Dr. Hynek, he states "Hynek had once assured me that if it ever turned out that a secret study had been conducted, the American public would raise an unbelievable stink against the military and intelligence communities. It would be an outrage, he said, an insult to the whole country, not to mention a violation of the most cherished principles of American democracy." (p. 285)


Elsewhere, regarding the Pentacle document he remarks "It is hard to excuse the betrayal of science that took place when the intelligence community decided to bar the Robertson Panel from direct access to the knowledge Pentacle and his group had obtained." while of Hynek, he laments "Hynek was a quiet man, who disliked confrontation and scandal, feared authority and was in awe of secrecy. He once told me plainly that 'he would not look under the bed even if he knew for certain that something was hidden there.'" (pp. 425-426) -B:.B:.]

I find it odd that a group that claims to be interested in the historical study of our field, as Just Cause does, should fail to see the significance of the Pentacle Memo, which is an authentic document, when so much time, money and ink have been devoted over the last several years to an in-depth analysis of the MJ-12 papers, which were faked. Perhaps the Pentacle memo only proves that scientific studies of UFOs (and even their classified components) have been manipulated since the fifties. But it also suggests several avenues of research which are vital to the future of this field: why were Pentacle's proposals kept from the panel? Were his plans for a secret simulation of UFO waves implemented? If so, when, where and how? What was discovered as a result? Are these simulations still going on? I invite your group to turn its investigative resources and its analytical talent to this important task.

In reading Forbidden Science, you should recognize that the book is a Diary, no, an analytical report or a memoir. Therefore many important inferences, many relevant details, can only be found by reading between the lines. Your preliminary analysis of the Pentacle memo is not unfair, but it is somewhat simplistic, and it takes it out of context. I invite you to go back for a second, closer reading.

/s/ Jacques Vallee
cc: Fred Beckman

Subj: Re: "THE" James Oberg?
Date: 94-08-17 07:20:07 EDT
From: JamesOberg
To: Density 4

Professional Profile James E. Oberg
Address: Rt 2 Box 350, Dickinson, TX 77539
FAX or phone: 713-337-2838

  • Born Nov. 7, 1944, NYC, NY. Married 1969, two sons (b. 1977, 1984).
    SSN 057-36-4930
    US Passport # Z6994652, expires 3/3/02, issued in Marseilles, France on March 3, 1992

  • Education: B.A.-- mathematics (summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa), Ohio Wesleyan University, 1966, departmental honors in math (orbital rendezvous), honors in Russian
    M.S. (plus additional Ph.D. coursework), Applied Mathematics (Astrodynamics), Northwestern University, 1969
    M.S. Computing Sciences (compiler design), University of New Mexico, 1972. USAF Squadron Officer School // Command and Staff College // DoD Computer Institute faculty

  • Profession: Manned Spaceflight Operations Specialist (Past, Present, and Future)
    Avocation: Expert in Russian Space Technology, Operations, History, and Policy

  • Sample Specialties:
    Space Station Habitability // Role of Man-in-Space // Technology Transfer Vulnerabilities/Opportunities
    Space Hardware and Facilities Assessment // Accurate Policy Options
    Analysis Problems of high-tech complex systems control center operations and decision-making International Cooperation & Competition // "Lessons Learned" Overviews Russian military/civil aerospace operations, accidents, historical controversies Divergent, Innovative Alternative Approaches to Complex Technical Problems Technological Defenses Against Biosphere Threats ("Planetary Engineering")

  • Recent consultees on Soviet/Russian spaceflight include:
    NASA -- (Johnson Space Center, NASA Headquarters, Marshall Spaceflight Center and JPL)
    Rockwell Space Operations Company // National Air and Space Museum Fairchild Space Company (Germantown, MD) // TRW Corporation (Redondo Beach)
    Hamilton Standard // McDonnell Douglas Space Station Office (Washington, DC)
    Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) // Government Accounting Office (GAO)
    National Science Foundation // U.S. Army Engineering Center (Fort Leonard Wood, MO)
    Association of Space Explorers // United States Information Agency // Voice of America
    United Nations Outer Space Affairs Division // British Interplanetary Society // RAND Corporation
    International Space Hall of Fame (Alamogordo) // Space Commerce Corporation (Houston)
    Sotheby's of New York // George Marshall Institute (Washington,DC) // Boston Museum of Science
    Teledyne Brown Engineering (Colorado Springs) // U.S. Library of Congress Federal Research Division
    Science Applications International Corporation (New York City) // AT&T Bell Labs (Whippany, NJ)

  • CBS News (including 60 Minutes, CBS Evening News, Morning News)
    ABC News (including Evening News, Nightline, Good Morning America)
    NBC News (including Evening News) // CNN News (including News, Crossfire)
    Radio Free Europe // Radio Liberty // BBC // CBC // NPR "As It Happens"
    PBS NOVA Russian space miniseries "The Russian Right Stuff" (WGBH)
    Most major U.S. newspapers, newsmagazines, wire services, and radio networks

  • Publications: Author of more than 400 popular magazine articles on spaceflight around the world, and of eight books including Red Star in Orbit (Random House), Pioneering Space (McGraw-Hill), Mission to Mars (New American Library), and, most recently, Uncovering Soviet Disasters (Random House).

  • Books in preparation on "Space Age Folklore", "Russian Secrets", "Future of the Russian Space Program", and "Climate Engineering on Earth". Also, leading speaker and commentator on Russian space affairs.

  • Languages: Eloquent English, good Russian and French, medium German, Latin.

  • Professional Honors: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, National Space Society, British Interplanetary Society, Clear Lake Council of Technical Societies, Russian Academy of Cosmonautics Nov 12, 1993


Obscuris Vera Involvens:

-Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D., etc.
"No, no, no -- not you, m'lord, the other m'lord, m'lord."