UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 4

Re: Cosmic Top Secret

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 13:29:54 -0500
Archived: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 10:36:28 -0400
Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret


>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:57:59 EST
>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 22:25:34 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 21:41:59 -0400
>>>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>>>>From: Anthony Cipoletta <cipey.nul>
>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>Subject: Cosmic Top Secret
>>>>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:04:44 -0500

Hi Robert,

I appreciate the chance to answer your objections. Your comments
are thoughtful, but I have some objections of my own.

>>>3. The GAO, in its search for Roswell related documents, noted
>>>on page 80 of their 400+ page overview background package that
>>>they had noted documents classified TOP SECRET RESTRICTED even
>>>though they had been told (Majestic 12) that no such designation
>>>was in use at the time (1954).

>>No, this is incorrect. I believe you are talking about
>>Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data both of which refer
>>to nuclear related information. Again, I would like to see such
>>a document that can be independently obtained from an archives.

>In my research, I have actually seen documents that were marked
>with Top Secret Restricted that had absolutly nothing do with so
>called "Restricted Data." From documents that I have seen from
>the Archives, not to mention photocopys I have seen over the
>years many highly classified documents were not stamped
>properly, or created exactly as the manual said they should be
>created, marked or stamped. This didn't diminish from the fact
>that they were highly classified until they were declassified,
>just career level govt workers, White House workers and staff
>members didn't always "do it by the book."

Please note the challenge at the bottom of this page. Please
produce one such document.

>>>I had also noted, in Archives, documents classified as SECRET
>>>RESTRICTED and CONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED..... When I worked on
>>>classified programs relating to nuclear activities, one very
>>>frequently saw SECRET RESTRICTED DATA and CONFIDENTIAL
>>>RESTRICTED DATA on classified documents.

>>Again, I don't think you saw Secret Restrict, but rather Secret
>>Restricted Data (SRD)

>>The GOA Roswell investigators were cleared for access to nuclear
>>weapons data and could see Top Secret Restricted Data.

>>One problem in researching at archives is that documents
>>containing Restricted Data must be reviewed by the Energy
>>Department for release in addition to the originating agency. A
>>real problem when nuclear capable units of, say the Air Force,
>>are involved.

>>>In addition I required a Q clearance which was normally thought
>>>of as being somewhere between SECRET and TOP SECRET.

>>This is completely false. A Q clearance was necessary for access
>>to nuclear data. It is not between anything.

>While that may technically be true, List members will recall a
>much earlier post from me directly quoting the Congressional
>testimony of the director of Sandia Labs. He stated that a Q
>clearance was equivilant to a Top Secret and a L clearance was
>equivilant to a Secret. Bottom line is these clearences only
>apply to nuclear materials and a person with a Q clearance could
>not walk over to a DOD project and expect to be given knowledge
>about it even if it concerned nuclear materials.

And that is a mis-statement. A Q-clearance and a TS clearance
will get you access to TS nuclear information. One goes with the
other.

>A DOD person shouldn't expect to walk over to DOE HQ and be
>given access to weapons material... even though said person may
>have TS/Codeword clearances relating to the DOD side of say a
>nuclear weapons project.

>The DOD person would have to go over to DOE, demonstrate a need-
>to-know, be cleared for access and get investigated to get an L
>or Q Clarence. The DOE person would have to go over to DOD,
>demonstrate a need-to-know, be cleared for access and get
>investigated to get a clearance into the DOD project.

If you had not cut the portion of my message out that pertained
to military personnel, we could now see where I said that
military personnel are no longer (after 1955) required to have Q
or L clearance. They are in the Personnel Reliability Program
which allows them access to nuclear data/weapons. There is
another Special Access Program, Critical Nuclear Design
Information - off the top of my head CNWIDI which doesn't look
correct - is the program.

Your assertion that DOD personnel have to go to DOE to
demonstrate a "need to know" is incorrect. They have to
demonstrate such only to their superiors.

>>Security manuals are readily available to researchers so
>>mis-statement like this could easily be avoided with a little
>>reading.

>Again, in my visits to the archives, I have found that many
>documents were not created by the book, nor were they stamped by
>the book and in some instances some of them did not have any
>kind of TS control number... even though that is required.

I didn't get my information from visits to archives although I
have discover nearly one hundred formerly Top Secret documents
there dealing with foo-fighters, ghost rockets and UFOs. I
lived and breathed security for over seven years. I think there
is a little difference in the experience level here.

Robert, please send me a photocopy of just one Top Secret
Restricted document from 1954 or before and the source
information. I continue to doubt that such exist, but I can be
convinced otherwise. During the last 50+ years marking and
procedures have changed and each agency has some leeway in the
marking and controlling their documents.

As for document found at the Archives without everything in
order, I have answer this objection about a dozen time. In
preparing document for the public many time the declassification
personnel might remove or change marking, coversheets, and
control #s, etc.

As applied to supposed "leaked" documents that are from current
sources, this argument holds no water with me, it is an
indication that the fabricators, I repeat here, the fabricators
don't know any better. Neither do many of the so called vaulted
"researchers."

Best regards,

Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
http://www.project1947.com/
P. O. Box 391
Canterbury, CT 06331
(860) 546-9135


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com