by Eric Julien
from ExopoliticsInstitute Website
An audit of
the SEPRA, a service located
within the CNES to study the UFO phenomenon, was carried out
by the Fleximage company (sic) in November 2001. Despite its
relative seniority, the OFFICIAL and CONFIDENTIAL document to which
we had access is extremely topical. What is an audit? It is a report
ordered by an organization, public or private, by a third considered
impartial. It aims at evaluating activity and making recommendations
on the action to be taken for the future of the aforementioned
About thirty graphs of the audit,
provided by the SEPRA, testifies to its activity and the
undeniable reality of an enigmatic phenomenon for scientific study.
One will be astonished however by the difference between this
under-sourced institution and the private sector whose ufological
associations count several hundreds of people for the same type of
activity! The effectiveness of these last thus does not suffer the
comparison. The difference? The stamp of the State! But who
in the State? The only technical relations between the SEPRA
and the internal services of the CNES (requests for data)
relate to the orbitography and the balloons (20 a year).
This essentially resembles a list of
products before entering the market.
The report breaks up into four parts :
The latter is a list of reports of talks of thirty-three personalities delivering their opinion on the UFO problem and the activity of the SEPRA, opinions which will be the subject of a summary in the second part, and on which, by definition, the audit is based. On its hundred and fifty pages, the useful part represents only thirty percent, of which the synthesis of the opinions are on four pages. What is striking is the emphasized selection.
François Louange says to us,
The public, which pays its taxes and
which finances the CNES, therefore the SEPRA,
especially if its budget must grow, does not seem "concerned of near
or by far by the problems of the UFO", except to provide
testimonial information which is SEPRA main function precisely.
We classified in the soldiers three members of the CNES (out of the ten) whose role concerns National Defense. Moreover, the military cabinet of Matignon belongs to the twelve representatives "National Defense". In addition to the soldiers, the reader could be astonished by the place (30%) which occupies the CNES in his characteristic to that, whereas the thin supply of in-house data does not justify it !
Let us point out that the CNES has an orientation more technical than scientific, which however requires the comprehension of the greatest mystery of all times. In the "Research centers", we find three members of CNRS and one of the CEA. It is indeed a "certain" vision of the representativeness of the scientific world. The more so as, on these four personalities, two are at the top of the… administrative hierarchy ! But where are the real researchers ? In the media, of the four people interviewed, we find three personalities of the French televisual landscape (TF1, France 2, France 3), in other words the people are very motivated by the UFO phenomenon and believe the plethora of broadcastings on the subject. Things can of course always change.
The other journalist is of a big
national daily, section science and medicine. It would be very
premature to count there the relevant number of articles of the UFO
apart from those mentioned in the audit. The two other organizations
of State are by definition subjected to the duty of reserve. You
wonder "but who is thus THE representative of the citizens being
expressed in the name of the sixty million French ?". Probably an
effective counterweight vis-a-vis this bureaucracy. It is about a
Deputy and mayor, that of a locality of twelve thousand inhabitants,
near the Toulouse pole of the CNES: Ramonville
This confession of a contradiction
suffices for itself.
This way of insisting on the representativeness of the people interviewed has something indecent about it because, let us point out it, it acts as a confidential document resulting from a public institution. It reveals the double language which will be illustrated along its reading. Words without strong actions… In reality, the audit is a remarkable work of a tightrope walker. Swung between the good will to save what is possible to save (communication with the public) and not to offend the soldiers and the top management of the CNES, the analyst skillfully stresses where it is painful.
One cannot attribute the list of “representatives” to him since it probably comes from the general direction, itself maybe “advised” by Matignon. Let us point out that the audit has been followed by some facts, which is a clear justification of the François Louange trials. The series of little steps below seems to coincide with the two years that it should take to capture the data in the remaining 3000 files at the end of 2001. Indeed, among his detailed conclusions, one of them recommend to attach SEPRA to Management:
What was made during 2004. A considered magazine with scientific vocation, dealing with sky and space, and which had shouted on the roofs the death of the SEPRA with a not disguised satisfaction did not have obviously good information from the National Center of Space Studies! A paradox or a disavowal? The other "encouraging" sign is the creation of a steering committee of ten people whose composition must be sufficiently eclectic, and, this to be formed lies with the audit. It has a few months to form, Arnaud Benedetti, director of the communication of the CNES, indeed announces the establishment of such a committee, remaining under the control of the DG of the CNES.
This audit thus seems to be the flight plan of the future SEPRA. Where will its navigation lead to? The question is to know if the attitude of the CNES will radically change in its opening to others. Let us reveal facts. The report specifies that an official letter of the embassy of the USSR arrived at the CNES in February 1983 after the GEPAN requested it. The Academy of sciences of the USSR confirmed its engagement in advanced studies on the UFO.
Timidity or strategy? But by the way, what can the Academy of Sciences in France do twenty years after its counterpart ? Are the Russian scientists victims of a major hallucinatory influence ? European side, it is into 1992 that the European member of Parliament Belgian Mr. di Rupo deposited a proposal of resolution (B3-1990/90) "aiming at creation of a,
... thirteen years later ! In South America, at the time of a meeting in 1998 on the NAP, between the SEPRA and the very official Comité de Estudios de Fenomenos Aéreos Anomalos in Chile,
Still one? As for the USA, François Louange summarizes at the very least a curious point of view :
One imagines that, if there is secret, it is precisely because there is information useful to collect! Towards who is this opening to others likely to succeed? The introduction of the audit seems to give a track :
Would the serious and organized
ufologists be likely to collaborate with the SEPRA in its
But more than these facts, in fact the underground intentions count:
Thus, the people interviewed do not
reject the role of the soldiers for reasons of ethics but because
the State is wary of its citizens!
In other words, all is only one business of communication to tap information of the public in the reports of Police Force, themselves military. Nothing on the scientific justification itself ! It is not moreover the immediate object of SEPRA since François Louange indicates that, of the three initial functions (counter, analysis and research), only will remain the two first.
With others the care of the Research and Development. But who? Fleximage affirms high and strong that the SEPRA must find again its capacity of communication. It is essential! That is to say. What will the public get in return of its docility in the police confessional? The audit explains it clearly:
The SEPRA is also supposed to publish technical documents and to place them at the disposal of the public. In short, to communicate a little more than today. It should be said that the number of statements recorded break down. Problem of confidence to be solved ? Let us add,
There will be probably never again be waves of UFO in France but for the rains of meteorites or MIR station. Though it is,
About which clear and single speech does
speak one ? That which justifies the survival of the SEPRA,
i.e. “scientific” and “civic” reasons according to the public power
Who decides the stakes? Between
Scientific Research and National Defense, which has the largest
On a side the State, other the irrational ones. Isn't this a little reducing? The role of the SEPRA is a pledge of progress in knowledge for the middle and the long term. It is thus essential that it goes on and adapts to expectations. But a double question exposes itself in the audit... Who is at the disposal of who? Or of what?