UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 5

Re: Cosmic Top Secret

From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 13:12:58 -0500
Archived: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 11:52:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 04:42:06 EST
>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret

>>From: Jan Aldrich <project1947.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 21:18:42 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Cosmic Top Secret - Aldrich

>>>From: John W. Auchettl <Praufo.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 22:19:00 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

>>>>>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.

>>>What Jan said is wrong, in fact Stan is correct.



>>All that I can say is your post is nonsense.


>>My access during my stay in Europe was NCSA, Cosmic Top Secret
>>Atonal. I did not have a COSMIC Top Secret Clearance a la Robert
>>Dean. This is quite incorrect! During my stay I was authorized
>>to see COSMIC Top Secret information relevant to my duties. My
>>clearance was Top Secret, when I left Europe my access to COSMIC
>>Top Secret information ended, but my Top Secret clearance
>>continued. Again, see AR 380-5.

>Hi Jan, EBK & List,

>Jan, not bad for Sergeant (Fd Arty Meteorology). Your OMPF at
>NARA must be very impressive. But I digress.

>The realisation that when you departed the European Theatre and
>you assess to that, stopped, must give some idea that you went
>down or across a level (human lock). Well I hope it did?

>Let's beg to differ on this Jan.

>I think I will stay with what I know. And I would advise others
>to do the same.

>However, it looks as if a lot of new data, levels, departments &
>corrections etc are coming from you, as you search the Web and
>discover other crown acts, executives, governments, groups,
>compartments, projects, departments, countries - it's a
>nightmare and under constant review! The system is a little more
>complex than first thought.

>That is why you have posted 3 new supplements on the subject!

>General Define:


>Security Information Defined:


>Control Of Classified Information:


>Let me again repeat:

>The inexperienced always leave out the levels in the structure,
>I have no idea why. I think it's because most see it as a
>'document restriction system' (paper lock) when it is a 'human
>restriction system' (human lock).

>The problem is that everyone thinks that the Classification
>defines the security, but it does not!

>It is a little more complex than a black rubber stamp on a
>document in the archives, and takes a bit of research to grasp.

>On this matter, Stan still has my vote!


As you say you will stay with what you know. Another way of
saying, "I prefer to remain ignorant." I am posting reference
information so that you or the Update readers who wish to learn
about security clearance and procedures can check what I say
against official information, and not as you characterized them
as new data or corrections. Readers of Updates don't have to
take my word for it; they can read the references!

The security system is actually very simple. Your
characterization a la Bill Spaulding is ridiculous.

As for inexperience, I have initialed over 1000 clearance
investigation from National Agency Checks to Special Background
Investigation. How many have you done, John?

Three time a week I gave oral security briefings to incoming
personnel which involved nuclear weapons, NATO Classified
documents, information security, OPSEC, COMSEC, physical
security, etc., etc. And you, John probably did similar work
that is why you're so knowledgeable and don't need to look at
anything I've posted. You prefer to stick with what you know.

I have been inspected by all levels of command up to and
including the Defense Nuclear Agency. The DNA inspection was
very interesting as they listed several deficiencies, later in a
message to the commander, they retracted all their objections
and stated, "We do not characterize visits with such ratings as
excellent or superior. Your program is superior." An interesting
exception. I am sure your experience is comparable.

I have filled all these positions during my tenure in security
and intelligence among others:

Security Manager
Top Secret Control Officer
Classified Document Custodian
COMSEC Custodian
Critical Nuclear Position
COSMIC Top Secret Control Officer

I was the main trainer for the Nuclear Release Authentication
System in both nuclear capable units I was assigned to in
Europe. That means I trained all assigned nuclear personnel in
all aspects of command and control, two person operations,
security, and codes. As COMSEC Custodian I had overall
responsibility for all code and key material in the unit and for
the nuclear weapons program codes and keys, something close to
900 line items. In both units I served for long periods of time
without an officer because the commanders were confident in my
abilities. So I was also primary staff officer, S-2. And John,
you have, of course, done similar work, correct?

Further, in the absence of my commander, I was assigned to brief
the Southern European Tack Force (SETAF) Chief of Staff. I wrote
letters and directives for the signature of the Commanding
General of SETAF. In addition I have written training material
used Army wide, revising the whole meteorological crewmen's
assigned tasks with evaluations of expected performance. I
prepared the Individual Training portion of the Training Test
Support package and edited the entire package for the new
equipment evaluation of the Meteorological Data System. I was
also appointed as Assistant Adjutant in an organization
commanded by a full colonel, an unusual position for an NCO.

So I am not as your innuendo implies an inexperience sergeant? I
have the expertise to evaluate supposed insider stories on UFOs
and super secret projects.

On the other hand, your ludicrous characterization of the
information security system reveals a lack of understanding.
This is probably why you didn't answer my comments on your
little scheme.

You have completely embarrassed yourself with silliness, and you
should withdraw to avoid further embarrassment.

Oh and BTW, you missed these two typos above NCSA, Cosmic Top
Secret Atonal which should read CTSA, COSMIC Top Secret Atomal.

Your typo "assess" should read access, and important concept in
dealing with classified information and much misunderstood. See
AR 380-5.

Jan Aldrich
Project 1947
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