This is the long awaited UMF Mag #IV and we apologize for the lengthy delay. Life has been hard for all of us since the great earthquakes and to make things worse, our bbs and WHQ "OBITUARY" is temporarily down until new hardware arrives from other locations. Big apologize go to TRSI^ZENITH due to us "disappearing" suddenly and without notice. Hopefully things will be back to normal soon! And the bbs WILL be back within a few weeks with -6 NODES RINGDOWN / 2.6 GIGS ONLINE- [MEtONeR]

This is a transcript of the song MANIFEST from Sepultura's CHAOS A.D. album, it is about an event which happened in South America not too long ago.

MANIFEST

Friday, October 2nd, 1992 Chaos has descended in "Carandiru," the biggest penitentiary complex in South America. Over a hundred inmates dead and hundreds injured on the massacre. The police arrived with helicopters and over two hundred armed forces. They took the jailblock called "Pavilhao Nove" and opened fire on the inmates in a holocaust method of annihilation. The government of the city of Sao Paulo cannot control the brutality of its police. Over eighty percent of the inmates were not sentenced yet. The bodies were filled with bullets and bites from the police dogs. The police try to hide the massacre saying there were only eight deaths. The violence of Brazilian cops is very well known outside of Brazil, This kind of extermination is a method that they use to get rid of the overpopulation in the jails. The violence of the cops left the whole pavilion destroyed after the rebellion.

"Pavilhao Nove" (Pavilhao 9)

=============================================================================

ARTICLE 1

Reprinted from WIRED Issue 1.6

BIG BROTHER WANTS TO LOOK INTO YOUR BANK ACCOUNT (Any Time It Pleases)

The US Government is constructing a system to track all financial transactions in realtime-ostensibly to catch drug traffickers, terrorists, and financial criminals. Does that leave you with the warm fuzzies-or scare you out of your wits?

By Anthony L. Kimery ascii'ed by The P/\NTHER -TRZ/TRSI/UMF-

There wasn't much to go on. The Police salvaged the slip of paper that a small time East Coast drug dealer tried to eat before being arrested, but on it they found scribbled only a "John." This frustrated the police. They had anticipated more incriminating information on the man they believed was the supplier not only to the dealer they'd just busted, but also to dozens of other street corner crack peddlers.

With two slim leads, the police weren't technically equipped to do much more than antiquated detective work that probably wouldn't yield evidence they could use to indict John. So they turned to the quasi-secretive, federal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) for the digital sleuthing they needed.

Less than 45 minutes after receiving the official police request for help, FinCEN had retrieved enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing from government databases that the district attorney prosecuting the case was able to seek indictments against John on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to traffic narcotics. The local police were impressed.

Launched with a low-key champagne reception at the Treasury Department in April 1990, FinCEN is the US government's (perhaps the world's) most effective financial crime investigation unit. Even Russian President Boris Yeltsin asked for its help in locating stolen Communist Party funds. This start-of-the-art computer-snooping agency is quietly tucked away under the auspices of the Treasury Department. Its mission is to map the digital trails of dirty money, be it the laundered profits from drug sales , stolen S&L, loot, hidden political slush funds, or the financing conduits of terrorists. It's the only federal unit devoted solely to the systematic collation and cross-analysis of law enforcement, intelligence, and public databases.

Until August 1993, FinCEN headquarters was an old Social Security Administration building with a ceiling ravaged by asbestos abatement crews, but that didn't seem to faze director Brian Bruh (he retired in October). With 25 years of experience in law enforcement, Bruh is a seasoned federal cop who has headed up criminal investigations at both the IRS and the Pentagon. Prior to overseeing FinCEN, he was the chief investigator for the Tower Commission, President Reagan's blue ribbon probe into the Iran-Contra scandal. FinCEN was his crowning achievement, and he took pride in directing visitors to FinCEN's computer command center as he touted the agency's successes.

In private and in testimony to Congress, statistics roll off Bruh's tongue. Last year FinCEN's computer operations center responded to priority requests for tactical intelligence on nearly 12,000 individuals and entities, doubling the 1991 workload. The 1995 total will be three times the 1991 sum. Longer-term strategic analytical reports have been completed for 715 investigations involving 16,000 other individuals and entities.

Two of the government's biggest strikes against organized drug-money laundering-operation Green Ice (a lengthy DEA operation that resulted in the arrests of high-ranking Cali and Medellin cartel financial officers and the seizure of US$54 million cash and assets) and Polar Cap V (a spinoff of Green Ice that culminated in April 1990) - owe a great deal to FinCEN for having identified and targeted money laundering activities via computer. In the Polar Cap operation, FinCEN's computer tracking documented more than US$500 million in financial activity by 47 individuals who have since been indicted on drug trafficking and money laundering charges.

Inside FinCEN's new digs on the second floor of a gleaming high-rise office building down the road from the CIA in Vienna, Virginia (otherwise known as "Spook City"), the talents of the IRS, FBI, DEA, Secret Service, and other traditional federal cops such as customs agents and postal inspectors are pooled. According to senior intelligence officers, these investigative units can access the resources of the CIA, the National Security Agency (which intercepts data on electronic currency movements into and out of the United States, some of which make their way into FinCEN's analyses), and the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Bruh and other FinCEN officials openly acknowledge their association with the CIA, but they refuse to discuss further any aspect of FinCEN's dealings with it or any other intelligence agency. In addition to the CIA, intelligence officials have admitted, off the record, that the National Security Council and the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) have also joined FinCEN's impressive intelligence crew. In short, FinCEN is a one-of-a-kind cauldron containing all the available financial intelligence in the United States.

"It's the first ever government-wide, multi-source intelligence and analytical network brought together under one roof to combat financial crimes," said Peter Djinis, director of the Treasury department's Office of Financial Enforcement and one of the few Treasury officials close to FinCEN activities.

"FinCEN is absolutely necessary," said a senior General Accounting Office (GAO) official involved in an audit of FinCEN required by new anti-money-laundering laws passed last year. The agency's report wasn't released by press time, but according to the GAO official, no irregularities were uncovered. However, the GAO's scrutiny skirted emerging concerns about privacy, civil rights, and the appropriate role of the intelligence community.

FinCEN's mission requires the involvement of the intelligence community, particularly in tracking the financial dealings of terrorists and in conducting financial counterintelligence, although few are willing to discuss the trend openly. Because these activities cross into the world of cloaks and daggers, some watchdogs are concerned that such endeavors will encroach on -privacy and civil rights. When you look at the power of FinCEN and its proposed offspring, their fears seem justified.

HOW TO BUST A JOHN

The whiz kids at FinCEN are good. Very good. That's why state and local police have come to depend on FinCEN to pull them out of the electronic-sleuthing quicksand. The case of John the drug supplier is a good example of one of their less-complex assignments, and it illustrates the adeptness with which the government can collate existing financial data.

Seated at a computer terminal inside FinCEN's former command post, a FinCEN analyst began the hunt. He started by querying a database of business phone numbers. He scored a hit with the number of a local restaurant. Next he entered the Currency and Banking Database (CBDB), an IRS database accessed through the Currency and Banking Retrieval System. CBDB contains roughly 50 million Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs), which document all financial transactions of more than $10,000. By law these transactions must be filed by banks, S&Ls, credit unions, securities brokers, casinos, and other individuals and businesses engaged in the exchange of large sums of money.

The analyst narrowed his quest by searching for CTRs filed for transactions deemed "suspicious." Financial institutions must still file a CTR, or IRS Form 4789, if a transaction under US$10,000 is considered suspicious under the terms of an extensive federal government list. There was a hit. A series of "suspicious" CTRs existed in the restaurant's ZIP code. Punching up images of the identified CTRs on his terminal, the FinCEN analyst noted that the transactions were made by a person whose first name was John. The CTRs were suspicious all right; they were submitted for a series of transactions each in the amount of US$9,5000, just below the CTR threshold of US$10,000. This was hard evidence that John structured the deposits to avoid filing a Form 4789, and that is a federal crime.

Selecting one of the CTRs for "an expanded review," the analyst got John's full name, Social Security number, date of birth, home address, driver license number, and other vital statistics, including bank account numbers.

Plunging back into the IRS database, the analyst broadened his search for all CTRs filed on behalf of the suspect, including non-suspicious CTRs. Only 20 reports deemed suspicious popped up on the screen, but more than 150 CTRs were filed in all. A review of the non-suspicious ones revealed that on several, John listed his occupation as the owner or manager of the restaurant identified by the telephone number on the slip of paper taken from the arrested drug dealer. The connection between the name and the phone number originally given to FinCEN was secured.

The FinCEN analyst then tapped commercial and government databases, and turned up business information on the restaurant showing that John had reported an expected annual revenue for his eatery of substantially less than the money he had been depositing, as indicated by the CTRs. Fishing in a database of local tax assessment records, the analyst discovered that John owned other properties and businesses. With the names of these other companies, the analyst went back into the CTR database and found that suspicious transaction reports were filed on several of them as well.

As routine as such assignments as this case may be, the chumminess between FinCEN and the intelligence community raises serious questions about the privacy and security for the financial records of citizens John and Jane Doe, considering the intelligence community's historic penchant for illegal spying on non-criminals. Given the vast reach and ease with which the government can now tap into an individual's or business's financial records on a whim, these questions have received far too little scrutiny.

WHOSE PRIVACY? "There are legitimate concerns" regarding privacy, a ranking House banking committee staffer conceded in an interview with Wired. "Quite frankly, there hasn't been much congressional oversight with respect to the intelligence community's involvement with FinCEN. When you start trying to look into this, you start running up against all kinds of roadblocks." The GAO official involved in auditing FinCEN agreed that questions regarding the intelligence community's involvement and attendant privacy concerns haven't been addressed. If such issues have been the subject of discussion behind the closed doors of the House and Senate intelligence committees, no one is talking openly about it.

Meanwhile, the potential for abusive intrusion by government into the financial affairs of private citizens and businesses is growing almost unnoticed and unchecked.

Two of the latest electronic inroads into the financial records of private citizens and businesses are "Operation Gateway," a FinCEN initiative, and the proposed Deposit Tracking System, which other intelligence agencies would like to see established. Both are inherently prone to abuse and provide a disturbing indication of the direction in which the government is moving.

Gateway is a pilot program launched in Texas this July that gives state and local law enforcement officials direct access to the massive federal Financial Database (FDB) through a designated FinCEN coordinator. The FDB contains the records that financial institutions have been filing under the Bank Secrecy Act for the last 23 years - CTRs, suspicious transaction reports, International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instruments reports, and Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts reports. In addition. Congress is expected to grant FinCEN authority to tap into the database of Forms 8300, which are reports of payments over US$10k000 received in a trade or business. These documents principally contain information on deposits, withdrawals, and the movement of large sums of currency. It is FinCEN's intent to give all state governments individual access to the FDB.

Under the Gateway proposal, results from all queries would be written into a master audit file that will constantly be compared against other requests and databases to track whether the subject of the inquiry is of interest to another agency or has popped up in a record somewhere else.

State coordinators designated by FinCEN will do the logging on, as FinCEN is uncomfortable with giving 50,000 federal agents and 500,000 police officers direct electronic access to its database. "This is very sensitive information," concedes Andy Flodin, special assistant to the FinCEN director . "We'd have to have additional security safeguards before we could open it up to every police agency."

But while the FDB contains only records on major money movements and thus is not as much of a threat to individual privacy, the Deposit Tracking System (DTS) is a potential menace. If implemented, the estimated US$12.5 million computer system could be used to penetrate the security of bank accounts belonging to you, me, and 388 million other bank account holders in the US.

The government argues that such a system is necessary for two reasons; first, to assess adequately the funding needed for federal deposit insurance and second, to locate the assets of individuals ordered by courts to make restitution for financial crimes - like the savings and loan crooks. (It seems the government can't trace most of the money they stole.)

The first reason stems from a requirement of the seemingly innocuous Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991- one of Congress's legislative response to the savings and loan debacle. The Act requires the FDIC to study the costs, feasibility, and privacy implications of tracking every bank deposit in the United States.

So far the DTS exists only on paper. The FDIC's completed feasibility study is currently being examined by Congress, but it is unlikely to act on before late next year. For the time being, the US$12.5 million price tag seems to be the biggest drawback to its implementation.

Concerns about he DTS have been widespread, although it has received scant attention in the mainstream press. But according to Diane Casey, executive director of the Independent Bankers Association of America, the DTS "would fundamentally change the relationships among banks, consumers, and the government in ways that have implications beyond banking policy. Out open and democratic society would be changed profoundly if any agency of the government maintained the scope of information on private citizens described in this proposal. It raises questions about our democracy that would have to be addressed by the highest policy making levels of government."

The American Bankers association (ABA) voiced equally serious concerns. The ABA doubts "whether there are any privacy safeguards that would be adequate to effectively protect this database from use by government agencies and, eventually, private parties," an ABA spokesman explains. "It is inconceivable to the ABA that such a database could be used only by the FDIC in deposit insurance coverage functions. Such a database...would provide a wealth of information for investigations being conducted by the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the IRS, to name but a few. Like the baseball diamond in Field of Dreams, build this database and they will come. Eventually, whether legally or illegally, they will gain access to this database."

The FDIC forcefully argued against the DTS in the 234-page draft report it submitted to Congress in June 1993, but it may not have the bureaucratic clout necessary to kill the proposal. Wired was told by intelligence analysts and congressional sources dealing with oversight of the intelligence community that federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies are privately clamoring for the system, apparently disregarding both the privacy issues and the systems's start up cost (which does not include the additional US$20 million a year the feasibility study said would be required for facilities, for salaries and benefits, and for routine hardware and software maintenance).

Further driving the intelligence agencies's desire for the DTS is the much-hyped role of economic intelligence gathering, a key focus of the Clinton administration's reform of the intelligence community. Agencies like the CIA view the system as a boon to their ability to monitor foreign financial dealings in the US, according to both congressional and intelligence courses.

Adding Intelligence to the Equation.

Regardless of the form it takes, the sources said, the DTS and any other financial databases that come down the pike could be easily interfaced to FinCEN's Artificial Intelligence/Massive Parallel Processing (AI/MPP) program, a criminal targeting system that will go online in a few years.

Because laundered money is moved undetected along with the millions of legitimate computerized wire transfers that occur daily, FinCEN's computer investigations naturally demand expert systems that can single the dirty money out of the crowd. FinCEN's current Artificial Intelligence capability allows it to search the Financial Database for suspicious, preprogrammed patterns of monetary transactions. While not very flexible, the system identified previously unknown criminal organizations and activities.

But FinCEN has a hush-hush US$2.4 million contract with the US Department of Energy's Los Alamo National Laboratory to develop what Bruh and other FinCEN officials described as a powerful "money flow model." Unlike FinCEN's current system, Los Alamo's AI software will look for unexplained, atypical money flows. Coupled with a massively parallel computer system, the AI/MPP could perform real-time monitoring of the entire US electronic banking landscape.

FinCEN's AI capabilities currently exploit the Financial Database for proactive targeting of criminal activity. The system automatically monitors the entire FDB database, constantly identifying suspicious financial activity in supercomputer-aided, rapid-response time. In addition to the FDB, FinCEN is applying AI to the Criminal Referral Forms that must be filed with FinCEN whenever banks, examiners, and regulators uncover financial activities they suspect are illegal.

In the near future, all of these government databases will be interfaced by way of AI/MPP technology. "MPP is critical to FinCEN's ability to analyze (banking) data to its full capacity," Bruh insists.

The pure power of such a "database of databases" terrifies critics. Though FinCEN and other authorities discount the potential for abuse, tell that to the CIA. It charter forbids it from engaging in domestic surveillance; nonetheless, it spied on Americans for seven consecutive presidential administrations (it says it finally ceased its internal spying in the mid-1970s).

FinCEN's AI operation has been employed legitimately with great success. Perhaps its least-known project was assisting the CIA in identifying and tracking the flow of money between Iran's state-sponsored Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organizations and the men linked to the bombing of the World Trade Center. According to a Treasury official and confirmed by Anna Fotias, FinCEN's congressional liaison, FinCEN identified suspicious transaction reports filed by a bank in New Jersey on wire transfers from Germany to the accounts of two of the men charged with the bombing. With the bank account in Germany identified, further AI processing-utilizing intelligence from the CIA's DESIST computer system, the world's most extensive database on terrorists-identified a company as a front for an Iranian terrorist group. Coupled with DESIST's data on the two men's terrorist connections, FinCEN was able to identify a number of previously unknown conduits of terrorist funding in the US and abroad. Similarly, FinCEN was crucial in identifying Iraqi assets in the US that were frozen in the wake of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, according to a Treasury official.

Still, given the CIA's less-than-spotless record, privacy advocates are likely to find it disturbing that there are some within the walls of CIA headquarters - apparently unbeknownst to anyone at FinCEN - who want to merge DESIST with FinCEN's eventual AI/MPP ability and with all the databases FinCEN routinely surveys. The justification for creating such a system is compelling: More likely than not it would identify scores of previously unknown financial conduits to terrorists.

Advocates of a full-time DESIST/FinCEN system carry their argument one step further: Hooked into the yet to be authorized Deposit Tracking System, the DESIST/FinCEN system would be able to identify terrorist financial movements in real time, thus providing early warning of potentially imminent terrorist actions. Some within the intelligence community take it still another step: They would have the system tied into the private computers that hold credit card transactions "so that we could have nearly instant time-tracking capability," with the CIA's Counterterrorist Center.

Conversely, a CIA/FinCEN/DTS endeavor could monitor on a real-time basis the financial activity of narcotics traffickers, since drug dealing also is within the purview of the CIA. The agency's Counternarcotics Center, of CNC, already works closely with FinCEN.

Before the CIA would be allowed to tap into a system as sensitive as the proposed Deposit Tracking System, it would have to clear plenty of civil liberties hurdles, not the least of which is the prohibition on the CIA from gathering intelligence on US citizens. As long as the DTS itself was shielded from direct access by the CIA, proponents could argue that the operation was allowable under law. Opponents, on the other hand, fear that the CIA would find a way to download, copy, or otherwise secretly access the DTS.

"The risk of the CIA getting its hands on this is serious-we know the kind of unscrupulous people who populate the spook world," said a Washington-area private investigator who conducts many legitimate financial investigations for a CIA-linked firm. "This kind of financial data, when coupled with other information like a person's credit history, could be used for blackmail, bribery, and extortion," said the investigator, who has a military intelligence background.

Bruce Hemmings is a veteran CIA clandestine-services officer who retired in 1989. Prior to the DTS proposal, he told Wired that the CIA routinely digs for financial dirt on people from whom the agency wants specific information. Typically they are foreign intelligence officers working in the US under a diplomatic guise, and this financial information is often used as leverage in getting them to talk. In less civilized venues, this is called blackmail.

DTS could present an inviting mechanism for quieting unwanted dissent or for defanging an unruly congressional leader bent on exposing some questionable CIA operation. Although still in its embryonic stage and in spite of the looming privacy obstacle it will inevitably confront, FinCEN is seen by many in the government as the catalyst for a powerful, all-seeing, all-knowing, global, financial-tracking organization. In fact, FinCEN is already working closely with INTERPOL, and Bruh's deputy just resigned to head up INTERPOL's US office.

As the privacy debate heats up, FinCEN's digital dirty-money trackers go on about their work, hoping they don't have to choose sides if what they do becomes a full-blown privacy invasion problem. As Bruh puts it, "There's tons of crooks out there who are disguising their criminal profits. FinCEN needs to computerize as much as possible to be able to identify the really significant criminals and their activities."

The question then becomes, at what point does it stop?

=============================================================================

ARTICLE 2

AMERICA'S NUCLEAR SECRETS

Article reprinted from Newsweek December 27, 1993 by The P/\NTHER/TRSI/UMF

Experiments on human guinea pigs, unannounced nuclear tests, a pulsating wasteland of lethal atomic debris-the legacy of cold-war secrecy and superpower competition is just how becoming clear.

Scenes from the Nuclear theater of a long cold war. In the 1940s and '50s, when Americans still trusted their doctors and their government, researchers subjected hundreds of ill-informed people to doses of nuclear radiation, in order to study the effect on human beings. Later on, in two experiments on the West Coast, 131 prison inmates, many of them black, had their testicles irradiated. From 1963 on, the U.S. government conducted hundreds of unannounced nuclear tests. The Russians weren't fooled, but Americans were. Washington last secret underground detonation occurred as recently as April 4, 1990.

By the 1990s, America was awash in nuclear waste. Tons of plutonium from arms factories and spent fuel from nuclear reactors were stored haphazardly and unsafely, sometimes threatening plant workers and nearby residents. The public still has not been told the true dimensions of the toxic mess.

Bits and pieces of this disturbing story have been leaking out for years in press articles, scientific studies and congressional hearings. But only now is the extent of America's nuclear secrets coming into focus. It is clear that the U.S. government behaved far more maliciously and recklessly than most Americans ever suspected. The fact that Moscow's rival nuclear program was probably dirtier still, and even less humane, offers scant comfort.

Some things cannot be explained away, even by the imperatives of national security. The most conspicuous agent of revelation so far is Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary. Two weeks ago she blew the whistle on her own department and the rest of the government's nuclear establishment, by disclosing that, over a span of 45 years, the United States had set off 204 unannounced nuclear explosions and conducted radiation experiments on about 600 human guinea pigs. The scientist who conducted those tests so long ago surely had rational reasons: the struggle with the Soviet Union, the fear of imminent nuclear war, the urgent need to unlock all the secrets of the atom, for purposes both military and medical. But in the aftermath of the cold war, and measured against today's more stringent ethical and procedural standards, the science of the early nuclear age can seem almost barbaric. "I said, 'Who were these people [conducting experiments] and why did this happen?" O'Leary said in an interview with NEWSWEEK. "The only thing I could think of was Nazi Germany."

To date, O'Leary has told only part of the story, the tiny fraction that has emerged from a 32 million-page mountain of secret documents waiting to be declassified. Other parts have been dug up recently by local newspapers, notably The Albuquerque Tribune in New Mexico, and Westword, a Denver weekly. The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, weighed in last week with the first conclusive evidence that the U.S. government had conducted radioactive-warfare tests in the atmosphere. But information is being pried out of the bureaucracy an inch at a time. O'Leary had to fight with the Pentagon through 17 drafts of disclosure documents in order to declassify the amount of plutonium contained in stockpiles throughout the country (33.5 metric tons). She even had to battle her own staff to release a report two weeks ago on the deteriorating storage facilities for spent nuclear fuel.

Many facts have been uncovered by Congress as well including a subcommittee chaired in 1986 by Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts. His report was entitled "American Nuclear Guinea Pigs." After studying 31 experiments dating back to 1945, Markey wrote that U.S. citizens "became nuclear calibration devices for experiments run amok." He also charged: "Too many of these experiments used human subjects that were captive audiences or populations ... considered 'expendable': the elderly, prisoners, hospital patients, who might not have retained their full faculties for informed consent."

Starting in 1963, 131 inmates at two prisons in Oregon and Washington state were recruited for experiments paid for by the Atomic Energy Commission, a predecessor of today's Department of Energy (DOE). Each volunteer was paid about $200 and had to sign a consent form. "I hereby agree to submit to X-ray radiation of my scrotum and testes," said the form used in Oregon. The inmates were warned about the possibility of sterility and radiation burns, but the Oregon form said nothing about a risk of testicular cancer. After the experiment the Oregon men were given vasectomies-"to avoid the possibility of contaminating the general population with irradiation-induced mutants," wrote the late Dr. Carl Heller, who ran the tests. For that reason, Roman Catholic inmates were not allowed to participate, Markey's report noted.

The men were given varied doses of radiation as high as 600 roentgen (today the largest recommended dose is six roentgen for an entire year.) Those who received 15 roentgen or more became sterile temporarily. There is no evidence that any of them developed cancer as a result of the experiment. But none of the Washington prisoners has been tracked since the early 1970s: the inmates themselves didn't want continued medical scrutiny. In Oregon, where no follow-up tests were done either, some of the prisoners filed suit in 1976 demanding medical treatment. Eventually the Oregon state Legislature intervened, granting continued treatment to nine of the men and awarding them with a cash payment. The nine men split a total of $2,215.

Hot shots: Last month The Albuquerque Tribune published a series naming five of 18 hospital patients who were given "tracer" injections of plutonium in a government sponsored study between 1945 and 1947. Many of the patients were expected to die soon, but some cases didn't work out that way. Elmer Allen, an impoverished 36-year-old railroad porter from Texas, got a shot of plutonium in his injured leg. Three days later the leg was amputated above the knee and taken away by researchers. Allen didn't die for another 44 years, but long life was no blessing to him. His daughter, Elmerine Whitfield said he had seizures and was severely depressed. He drank too much. "I believe my father was aware something had been done to him." said Whitfield. But she insisted he never gave informed consent to the experiment. "I know he didn't understand plutonium," she said.

Scientists who worked in the dawn of the nuclear age defend the validity of the plutonium tests. "We should be extremely cautious about criticizing their work." says John Simpson, a retired astrophysicist who worked on health and safety issues as a group leader on the Manhattan Project, which developed the first atomic bomb. If research had not been done on humans, he says, "radioactive dangers would be greater throughout the world today."

Biophysicist Newell Stanard, an authority on the history of radiological research, says the plutonium tests were launched because several Manhattan Project workers in Los ALAMO, N.M. had been exposed to the material. No one knew for sure how much damage the plutonium would do to them or how quickly and thoroughly it would be expelled from their bodies. "There had been a lot or work with animals that showed rates of fecal and urine excretion of the plutonium, how much went to bone marrow and so on," says Stannard. "But there was this big question: will it be the same in man? The Manhattan Project said we've got to do experiments in terminal patients and see if the results are the same as in animals."

Stannard says that 11 of the 18 tests were done in Rochester, N.Y. by a respected internist, Dr. Sam Bassett; the others were scattered around the country. Were the patients fully informed? "I simply don't know," says Stannard. "I do know that Sam Bassett was a very straightforward, honest guy. I'm sure he told the patients he was going to do something." But plutonium research was a top-secret subject in those days. "I have a feeling Bassett told people they were taking something for the war effort," says Stannard.

Many other tests conducted on humans were benign and were performed quite casually, without a lot of red tape. "The level of acceptable informed consent has changed," says Dr. Merril Eisenbud, professor emeritus of environmental medicine at New York University Medical Center. He describes some of his own research. "Open-air [nuclear] weapons testing left iodine in the milk worldwide," he says. "One of my experiments was to determine the significance in terms of the dose absorbed by a child's thyroid. We used to get the children to come over from a pediatric clinic with their moms. We'd explain what we were doing, sit each child down and-using a scintillometer that didn't even touch him-measure radiation in the thyroid. We'd give the child a lollipop, and that was the end of that. Today you'd have to fill out so much paperwork that it would discourage people from participating in the test."

In the 1940s and '50s, many doctors weren't in the habit of explaining things to their patients. "Doctors weren't questioned," says Dr. Andrew Davis of Chicago, a frequent writer on radiation-health issues. "When you combine that with radiation technology, born of secrecy in the name of military security, it becomes easier to understand-if not condone-these experiments and accidents. Dr. Kildare could do no wrong."

Death Spray: In reality, of course, some researchers did numerous wrongs, as they are now defined. According to the GAO report, radiation was deliberately released into the atmosphere in at least a dozen secret tests in New Mexico, Tennessee and Utah between 1948 and 1952. The tests were part of an effort to develop a radiological weapon-or to defend against one, if the Soviets developed a death spray. At about the same time, the Hanford Nuclear Facility in Richland, Wash., was regularly showering its neighbors with radioactivity. A secret internal memo uncovered in 1986 described the infamous Green Run experiments, in which plant managers deliberately released a huge cloud of radioactive iodine-131, to see how far downwind it could be traced. The could floated over Spokane and drifted all the way to the California-Oregon border, carrying hundreds (or perhaps thousands) of times more radiation than that emitted by the 1979 Three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania.

Now that nuclear testing has ended, at least in the United States, the government is left with a vast, pulsating landscape of atomic waste dumps to clean up. The people who developed nuclear reactors and weapons were no more prescient about future environmental hazards than they were about health risks. The storage of spent fuel and other nuclear materials was shockingly sloppy. "Every time you turn over a new document, there's a $5 billion problem," says Dan Reicher, a special assistant to O'Leary.

The DOE's nuclear-weapons complex, spread over 4,000 square miles in 13 states, appears to be particularly hazardous. Steven Blush, a DOE safety official who was forced out of his job last spring, wrote a lurid report charging that the bomb factories averaged three accidents a day in 1991 and '92. Most of the mishaps were minor, but a few of them posed potentially major health threats to factory workers and nearby residents, Blush charged.

One of the most conspicuous problem plants is the DOE's weapons facility at Rocky Flats, outside Denver. Starting in 1989, a federal grand jury collected evidence about alleged violations of environmental law there. Early last year the grand jury tried to indict DOE officials and executives of Rockwell International, a former operator of the plant, accusing them of participating in "an ongoing criminal enterprise" by ignoring environmental laws.

The local U.S. attorney declined to prosecute, and instead announced a plea bargain with Rockwell, which agreed to pay a fine of $18.5 million-slightly less than the annual performance bonus it received for successful stewardship of the plant. The grand jurors continued to press their case, and when the story leaked to Westword, they found themselves under investigation for violation of secrecy laws. Now the grand jurors are hoping to testify before Congress. "It's doubtful that you could find a bigger environmental criminal than the Department of Energy," charges their lawyer, Jonathan Turley, an expert on environmental law at George Washington University. "It hasn't changed with the new administration," he maintains.

Morning after: O'Leary would dispute that. The secretary bucked her own bureaucracy by insisting that the DOE release a report on deteriorating storage sites for spent nuclear fuel. Aides warned that disclosure could cause liability problems. O'Leary insisted. "I want this done," she said. But there's a lot more to do. "It's as though you had a party every night for 45 years, and you never cleaned it up," says Thomas Grumbly, DOE assistant secretary for environmental restoration and waste management.

Grumbly is a worrier. He predicts that the figures currently quoted for the total cost of the cleanup-from $200 billion to $300 billion-may not even be close. "It could be a couple of times larger than that," he says. He frets about the notorious storage tanks at Hanford, where so many different wastes have been dumped that no one knows exactly what kind of witches' brew is in them. "Every time the phone rings after 10 o'clock at night, I think 'This is it we've had an event'," says Grumbly. Like his boss, he things the time has come for "throwing open the blinds" to shed some light on the nuclear-waste crisis. The government's complete disregard of the byproducts of its cold-war born nuclear obsession has left us with "the single largest environmental and health risk in the nation," he says. It may also be the last of America's nuclear secrets-and perhaps the most dangerous of them all.

A HUMAN HORROR STORY Plutonium: What doctors didn't tell Eda Charlton

Eda Schultz Charlton was alone and sick when she visited the University of Rochester's Strong Memorial Hospital in the fall of 1945. A protein deficiency had swollen her ankles and covered her body in a serious rash. Doctors also suspected a mild case of hepatitis. The 48 year old seamstress was newly widowed-her husband had died suddenly a year earlier. Her only son was in the service. Physicians put her on a high protein, low salt diet.

They also made Charlton an unwitting subject in a grotesque government sponsored medical experiment. On Nov. 27, 1945, according to records unearthed by The Albuquerque Tribune, doctors at Stong working for the Manhattan Project injected her with plutonium-239 to study how quickly the body rids itself of the radioactive substance. (The hospital never sanctioned the experiments.) Between 1945 and 1947, she and most of the 17 other patients in the secret program-11 of them in Rochester-received dosages of about .3 microcurie. That is about 43 times what is now regarded as the safe lifetime limit. Charlton wouldn't learn of the official poisoning for another 30 years.

Family members say they suspected she was monitored during her routine checkups over the years at Strong. The visits often turned into stays lasting several days-even when it was clear she wasn't all that ill. "They used to keep her in a section that was like a hotel," says her son, Fred Schultz. Once his mother said that doctors placed her in a sealed room to check her body for radiation. Efforts to glean any information were always rebuffed. In the early 1970s, the family quizzed one doctor who'd treated Charlton since 1950. "When I asked her about plutonium, she'd say, 'I don't know a thing about it'," recalled her daughter-in-law, Helen Schultz.

Hospital officials say they informed Charlton and other living victims of the experiment on behalf of the Atomic Energy Commission in 1974. The Schultzes say they learned about it from a doctor at Strong five years later. Doctors claim Charlton suffered no health problems from the radiation. She died of a heart attack in 1983. But Fred Schultz, now 73, remains bitter. "I was over there fighting the Germans who were conducting these horrific medical experiments," he said. "At the same time my own country was conducting them on my mother."

SINS OF A PARANOID AGE

Cold War: Desperate times made for desperate-and dangerous-measures

In 1949, WHEN MOST AMERICANS wanted nothing more than to "go to the movies and drink Coke," as W. Averell Harriman once put it, the Soviets exploded a Nuclear bomb. The onset of the cold war came as a cruel surprise. The United States had just won World War II. Was World War III around the corner? By 1951, when the CIA received an intelligence tip that seemed to indicate that the Russians were about to corner the world market in LSD, anxiety about communism had become paranoia. The CIA was particularly obsessed with mind control. At show trials in the East bloc, innocents with glazed eyes were confessing to impossible crimes, while American POWs in the Korean War were reportedly being "brainwashed" by the Chinese. Had the communists developed some of the new mind-bending drugs that could be used as a mass weapon against the West?

The LSD scare, like many intelligence tips in that era, turned out to be bogus. But that didn't stop the CIA from taking steps to develop its own mind-control program, code-named MKUltra. The technique that most intrigued the agency was LSD, a new psychoactive drug that could induce hallucinations. Unfazed when one of the agency's own researchers jumped out a window after experimenting with LSD in 1953, the CIA hired prostitutes in Greenwich Village, N.Y., and San Francisco to slip LSD doses to unsuspecting johns. CIA researchers dutifully recorded the results from behind two-way mirrors. Dozens of unwitting lowlifes went on wild trips, but the agency never did learn how to control anyone's mind. The experiment was finally abandoned in 1963.

The nuclear experiments that are now coming to light are just come of the examples of how far America went in the cause of combating global communism. In another phase of operation MKUltra, the CIA-seeking the perfect assassin- tried to create "guided animals." In one experiment, the agency wired up a cat (its tail was the antenna) that had a habit of wandering off the job and was eventually run over by a taxi. For years the Pentagon and the Atomic Energy Commission were conducting all manner of secret tests-from releasing clouds of radiation into the atmosphere in a determined attempt to build bigger and better bombs, to irradiating the testicles of prison inmates in order to find our how much would cause sterility. As it turned out, almost all the reports of Russian superiority in the cold war were hyped. When the development of the U-2 spy plane allowed overflights in the mid-to late 1950s, it was discovered that the "bomber gap" and the "missile gap" were phony. The only gap was the other way around: In 1961, the Pentagon had 98 missiles aimed at the Soviet Union, the Kremlin no more than 35 aimed at the United States.

For all its cold-war glamour, the CIA was not a very effective espionage agency in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Though it had reasonable success overthrowing left-leaning governments in the Third World, the agency utterly failed to penetrate the Kremlin (admittedly a difficult task against a police state). Still, it did not serve top leaders to admit this to the public.

In order to persuade lawmakers to pay for worthy causes like the Marshall Plan, it was sometimes necessary to make things "clearer than the truth," said Dean Acheson, President Truman's secretary of state. If that meant scaring people, so be it. Certainly, the people were ready to be scared: families built fallout shelters, while children learned how to duck under their desks.

Washington officials lied in part because they could get away with it. The press was cozier with policymakers in the 1950s, and lawmakers didn't really want to know what the CIA was up to, as long as the cause was battling the Red Menace. Hungry for higher budgets, the Pentagon inflated the threat it faced. And over time, even the most cynical politicians began to believe their own rhetoric. In the 1960 presidential campaign, John F. Kennedy was still warning about the missile gap. When his defense secretary, Robert McNamara, publicly admitted that none existed, Kennedy privately chastised him for telling the truth. McNamara apologized-and promptly ordered a massive buildup of America's nuclear arsenal.

=============================================================================

ARTICLE 3

The Randy Weaver Case...Another Federal Fiasco!

Reprinted from American Rifleman November 1993 by The P/\NTHER -TRZ-TRSI-UMF-

Seeing his dog, Striker, shot to death by masked intruders clad in camouflage, Sammy Weaver, 14, fired back in fear for his life. The 4 ft, 11"-tall youngster was hit in the arm, then shot in the back as he turned to run for home. He died instantly, killed by an agent of the federal government. Cradling her 10 month old daughter in her arms, Vicki Weaver stood in the doorway of her home, mourning her slain son, unaware that she herself had only seconds to live. In an instant a bullet tore into Vicki Weaver's face, blew through her jaw and severed her carotid artery. The bullet was fired from 200 yds. away by an agent of the federal government.

What had the Weaver family done to bring FBI snipers and submachine-gun-toting U.S. Marshals to the woods around their cabin on Ruby Ridge in northern Idaho? Why did the government act as though the Weavers and forfeited the protections guaranteed all Americans by the United States Constitution? Who made the decisions that led to their unjustified deaths and also to the death of deputy U.S. Marshal William Degan?

For the six men working near Weaver's plywood cabin on Ruby Ridge, Aug. 21 1992, was another day on a job that had been going on more than 16 months. Their employer, the U.S. government, was spending $13,000 a week, and there had been no end in sight to the work.

The cabin-really a shack-was home to 44-year-old former Green Beret Randy Weaver and his family-wife, Vicki; son, Sammy; and daughters, Sara, Rachel and Elisheba. It was also home to their young friend, Kevin Harris. There were subsistence hunters, and tended a garden, putting up vegetables. A generator produced occasional electricity. They had no TV, no radio.

This day there were some new men on the job site not far from the cabin-one, 42-year-old William Degan, had been brought to northern Idaho on special orders. He was to help plan a successful conclusion to the job.

The men in the woods were dressed in their work clothes-camouflage commando outfits complete with masks. They carried the tools of their trade-two-way radios rigged for quiet operation, night vision equipment, semi-automatic handguns, fully automatic military rifles and at least one silenced HK submachine gun. One of the men was a medic, prepared to care for any casualties.

The Weaver family had dogs. Somebody threw a rock to test their reaction. A golden retriever barked near the cabin and came running their way. A mission somebody in the Marshal Service had dubbed "Operation Northern Exposure" was about to end.

The "op" had included use of jet reconnaissance overflights with aerial photographic analysis by the Defense Mapping Agency, and placement of high-resolution video equipment recording activity by the Weaver family from sites 1 1/2 miles away-160 hours worth of tape used.

For nearly a year and a half, federal agents had roamed the area, picking locations for surveillance and for snipers. Degan belonged to the Special Operations Group, the Marshals' national SWAT team. The six on-site this day were deputy U.S. Marshals.

The target of all of this-and of a Federal law enforcement and prosecution effort that would eventually total approximately $3 million-was Randy Weaver. What kind of criminal was he to demand this kind of attention? Was he a major drug dealer? Serial killer? Was he a terrorist bomber?

No. On Oct. 24, 1989, Weaver sold two shotguns whose barrels arguably measured 1/4" less than the 18" length determined arbitrarily by Congress to be legal. The H&R single-barrels 12-ga. and Remington pump were sold to a good friend who instructed Weaver to shorten the barrels. The "good friend" was an undercover informant working for the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), who later told reporters he was in it "mainly for the excitement."

Eight months after he sold the shotguns, Weaver was approached by two BATF agent with an offer-spy on the Aryan Nations, a white supremacist hate group headquartered in northern Idaho, or go to jail. Weaver refused to become a government informer, and-six moths later-he was indicted on the shotgun charge.

On Jan. 17, 1991, as Weaver and his wife were driving to town for supplies, they encountered a pickup truck camper with its hood up, a man and a woman seeming to be in trouble. The Weavers stopped to offer their help. A horde of federal agents piled out of the camper. A pistol was pressed against Weaver's neck. Vicki Weaver was thrown to the slushy ground.

Weaver was arraigned before a federal magistrate, who later admitted he cited the wrong law. Out on bond, Weaver went back to his cabin. According to friends who testified in court, he and his wife vowed not to have any more dealings with the courts of the federal government. They would just stay on their mountain.

A hearing was set on the shotgun matter for Federal Court in Moscow, Idaho. The government notified Weaver by letter that he was to appear March 20, 1991. The actual hearing was held February 20-one month earlier. The error in dates was enough to give rise to a memo within the Marshal Service saying the case would be a washout. (Weaver did not show for the wrong date, either.) U.S. Attorney Ron Howen went to the grand jury anyway, and Weaver was indicted for failure to appear.

But why had the BATF picked Randy Weaver to set up as an informer? He was a man devoted to his family, a man with no criminal record, a veteran who served his country with honor. It was Weaver's beliefs that made him an ideal target. His unorthodox religious and political views were far outside mainstream America. He was a white separatist. And, Randy Weaver was little, a nobody.

Over the next 16 months, the feds painted Weaver as racist, as anti-semitic, as a criminal. But they had to entrap him into his only crime, altering two guns. The media were unquestioning. In print and on TV and radio, Weaver's home-the plywood shack he built himself-became a "mountain fortress," and then "a bunker," and "a stronghold protected by a cache of 15 weapons and ammunition capable of piercing armored personnel carriers."

The common shotguns Weaver sold became the chosen "weapon of drug dealers and terrorists" of "gangster weapons" that "have no sporting use." The media always added the universal out..."agents said." But there were no gangsters. There were no terrorist or drug dealers, just Weaver, the gun buyer and the government.

It was all a lie. Hate-hype. People believed it, maybe even the agents who planted the hate-hype began to believe it. It all ceased to matter on August 21, when Striker barked and sniffed out the agents spying on the cabin-lives changed, lives ended.

Nobody, except the people who were there, knows exactly what happened next. There were several versions of the story. But some facts jibe. Randy Weaver's little boy, Sammy-a kid whose voice hadn't yet changed-and Kevin Harris followed Striker. Harris and Weaver later said they thought the dog was chasing a deer. Harris carried a bolt-action hunting rifle. The boy also had a gun.

Without a warning a federal agent fired a burst into Striker, killing him. (It came out in court later that there had been a plan to take the dog "out of the equation.") The boy, frightened, shot back, and when one of the agents fired another burst, Sammy lay dead.

Kevin Harris shot deputy William Degan in the chest. He died a few moments later. The shooting ended relatively quickly. The agents would claim Harris fired first. Harris claimed he fired after the boy was shot. Agents told the media their men had been pinned down for eight hours. It was lie.

The dog was dead. The boy was dead. Deputy Degan was dead. Two American families had tragically lost loved-ones. During the night hours. Randy Weaver and Kevin Harris brought the little boy's body to a shed near the cabin and washed.

Deputy Degan's shooting brought in the FBI. Soon, the Weaver's property was ringed by a huge force of FBI, BATF, U.S. Marshals, Idaho state police and local law enforcement and Idaho National Guard. Among the federal law enforcement commanders was Richard Rogers, the head of the FBI's hostage rescue team, which includes its snipers. On the flight out, he took an extraordinary step-he decided to alter radically the prescribed rules of engagement of FBI sharpshooters.

Normally, agents can only shoot when they are facing death or grievous harm. But the 11 snipers that were positioned around the Weaver cabin were given new orders: "If any adult in the compound is observed with a weapon after the surrender announcement is made, deadly force can and should be employed to neutralize the individual." This meant Randy Weaver's wife would be fair game. It went on: "If any adult male is observed with a weapon prior to the announcement, deadly force can and should be employed if the shot can be taken without endangering the children." (Emphasis added.)

In words reminiscent of hollow justifications used in Waco, Texas, federal spokesmen kept telling the media of their concern for the children. In fact, Gene Glenn, the agent in charge of the siege, told The New York Times he considered the kids to be hostages. Yet they'd already killed one child.

The negotiators were not in place, and no effort had been made to contact the Weavers, when Randy Weaver, Kevin Harris-armed-and 16 year old Sara Weaver left then cabin and moved to the shed where Sam's body lay.

As the three reached the shed, an FBI sniper some 200 yds. away aimed at Weaver. He told the court he was aiming for the spine, just below the neck. He missed; shot Weaver in the back of the arm, the bullet exiting through the armpit.

Sara later told Spokesman Review staff writer Jess Walter in a copyrighted story: "I ran up to my dad and tried to shield him and pushed him toward the house. If they were going to shoot someone, I was going to make them shoot a kid."

At the cabin, Vicki Weaver was waiting at the door, holding her infant daughter, Elisheba. The sniper fired again. His bullet hit Vicki Weaver. She was dead before the baby hit the floor, miraculously unhurt. Harris was hit by bullet fragments and bone from Vicki's skull. He was bleeding badly. Randy Weaver, daughters Sara and 10 year old Rachel all saw the violent death.

Later, sniper Lon Horiuchi stated in court that killing Vicki Weaver had been a mistake; that he was aiming for Kevin Harris. Defense attorney Spence asked him, "You wanted to kill him didn't you?" He answered, "Yes, sir."

Sara Weaver recounted the night following her mother's death. Against from reporter Jess Walter's story:

"Elisheba cried during the night. She was saying, 'Mama, mama,mama.'...Dad was crying and saying, 'I know baby. I know baby. Your Mama's gone..'"

She told Walter that on Sunday, they tried to yell at federal agents and get their attention, to tell them that her mother was dead. She said they got no response. Instead they would hear FBI negotiators. "They'd come on real late at night and say, 'Come out and talk to us, Mrs. Weaver. How's the baby, Mrs Weaver,' in a real smart-alecky voice. Or they'd say 'Good morning, Randall. How'd you sleep? We're having pancakes. What are you having?'"

The FBI later claimed it had no idea that its sniper had shot Vicki Weaver. Yet, a New York Times stringer quoted FBI sources as saying they were "using a listening device that allowed them to hear conversations, and even the baby's cries in the cabin." Another lie?

On Thursday, August 27, radio newsman Paul Harvey used his noon broadcast to reach the Weavers, who he'd learned were regular listeners. Urging Randy Weaver to surrender, Harvey said, prophetically, "Randy, you'll have a much better chance with a jury of understanding homefolks than you could ever have with any kind of shoot-out with 200 frustrated lawmen."

As part of their efforts to make contact with the Weavers, the FBI sent a robot with a telephone to the cabin. But the robot also had a shotgun pointed at the door, so the Weavers feared that reaching for the phone could result in death or injury.

Somewhere in all of this, the FBI discovered the body of Sammy. They told the news media they didn't know he'd been killed.

The siege began to unravel six days after Vicki Weaver had been killed. Her body remained in the kitchen of the cabin all that time. Sara crawled around her to get food and water for her family. It was during this time that Randy Weaver and Kevin Harris dictated their version of their story to Sara. In this letter, Weaver accused his government of murdering his wife.

The news media, based on information from the feds, repeatedly reported that Vicki had been killed in "an exchange of gunfire" or in a "gun battle." More spin control.

The only shots were two-from the government's sniper.

Kevin Harris was the first person to come out. Sunday, August 30, badly wounded, he was rushed to a Spokane hospital where he was treated and charged with murder. A magistrate told him he was facing the death penalty.

The rest of the family came out on the next day. The surrender was negotiated not by the FBI-but by Bo Gritz, former Green Beret hero.

All the lies and federal spin control over the story were about to end. The case was going to court.

The 36 day trial took place in the U.S. District Court in Boise, with Judge Edward Lodge presiding. The jury of eight women and four men heard the government put on 56 witnesses. The defense rested without calling a single witness, confident that the government had destroyed its own case. They were right.

The jury deliberated for nearly three weeks, and found Harris not guilty of murder or any other charges leveled against him. They found Weaver not guilty of eight federal felony counts. The judge had earlier thrown out two other counts.

Weaver was found guilty of two counts: failing to appear in court and violating his bail conditions. He was declared not guilty of the gun charge-the seed of all this misery.

It was a bizarre trial, full of contradictions, with government witnesses countering each other's stories as to the events of August 21, and countering the events leading up to Vicki Weaver's death the next day.

The question of who fired first-Harris or the Marshals-was key to the jury deciding on the murder charge against Harris. In the end they believed Kevin Harris acted in self-defense. Earlier, the death penalty had been ruled out. The law the prosecution cited had been struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court two decades before.

The government spent days going over the Weavers' religious views, trying to establish they were racist and demonstrated a long-lived conspiracy to violently confront the government. The jury didn't believe it.

Marshal Service witnesses told about a series of pre-seige scenarios to root Weaver out of his cabin. But when pressed by the defense, they said they never considered simply knocking on the door and arresting him.

During the trial, the government admitted that the FBI had tampered with the evidence; that the crime scene photos given the defense were phony reenactments. Physical evidence had been removed and replaced. The prosecutor knew and had failed to tell the defense.

The prosecution also withheld documents that might have helped the defense. When ordered by the judge to produce them immediately, the FBI sent the material from Washington, D.C., via Fourth Class mail, which took two weeks to cross the country. For prosecutorial misconduct, the judge ordered the government to pay part of the defense attorneys' fees, an action almost unheard of in a criminal case. Prosecutor Howen also was forced to apologize in open court. At the end of the trial, he collapsed in the middle of a statement, telling the judge, "I can't go on."

Gerry Spence told the jury, "This is a murder case, but the people who committed the murder have not been charged. The people who committed the murder are not here in court."

After the trial, Spence told the New York Times, "A jury today has said that you can't kill somebody just because you wear badges, then cover up those homicides by prosecuting the innocent." "What are we going to do now about the deaths of Vicki Weaver, a mother who was killed with a baby in her arms, and Sammy Weaver, a boy who was shot in the back?" "Here you had federal agents come into a little county in northern Idaho, suspend state law and then say they had the right to eliminate anyone with a gun." "The crime he committed was not sawing off a shotgun. The crime he committed was refusing to go undercover for the BATF."-Garry Spence

Spence has asked the Boundary County, Idaho, prosecutor to bring charges against various federal agents. Should that happen, lingering questions about the Weaver case finally may be answered. Should that happen, lingering questions about the Weaver case finally may be answered. Should that happen another jury undoubtedly will serve notice to those who have forgotten that the United States government is supposed to serve its citizen, not entrap them, not defame them, not falsify evidence against them and absolutely not kill their children.

=============================================================================

ARTICLE 4

FIRE OFFICER'S GUIDE TO DISASTER CONTROL (CHAPTER 13 ONLY)

William M. Kramer, Ph.D.

District Fire Chief, Cincinnati Fire Division Director of Fire Science, University of Cincinnati

Charles W. Bahme, J.D.

Deputy Chief Los Angeles Fire Department (Retired) Captain, United States Naval Reserve (Retired) Attorney at Law

Fire Engineering Books & Videos A PENNWELL PUBLISHING COMPANY

SECOND EDITION

Copyright (C) 1992, Fire Engineering Books & Videos Park 80 West, Plaza Two, 7th floor, Saddle Brook, NJ 07662

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted by any persons whatsoever without permission in writing from the publishers

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Kramer, William (William Michael), 1944 Fire officer's guide to disaster control / William M. Kramer and Charles W. Bahme - 2nd. ed.

p. cm.

ISBN 0-912212-26-8

1. Emergency management - United States - Handbooks, manuals, etc 2. Fire departments - United States - Handbooks, manuals, etc. 3. Fire extinction - United States - Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Bahme, Charles William, 1914- HV551.3K73 1992 363.37'8'0973-dc20 91-43911

Printed in the United States of America

Book design by Bernard Schleifer

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

x Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control

CHAPTER 12 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS 377 --------------------------------------------------- Scope of This Discussion 377 Hazardous Materials Disasters Defined 378 What Are the Hazardous Materials? 378 Causes of Hazmat Disasters 379 Prevention of Hazmat Disasters 383 Types of Hazardous Materials Disasters and Some Examples 388 Control and Mitigation of Hazmat Disasters 403 Planning 404 Developing the Hazardous Materials Plan 407 Media Relations 416 Supporting Systems and Resources 416 Plan Review and Update 417 Annexes 417 Pre-incident Response Plans 418 Response Differences-Hazmat vs. Typical 418 Organizing the Hazmat Response 421 Operational Guidelines 424 Hazmat Apparatus and Equipment 426 Action-No Action Decision, Go-Not Go! 428 Postoperations Planning 430 Hazmat Incident Action 431 Hazmat Incident Response 431 Conclusion 435 References 435

CHAPTER 13 ENEMY ATTACK AND UFO POTENTIAL 439 ___________________________________________________________________

What is War? 439 Causes of War 440 Effects of a Nuclear Attack 444 World War II Nuclear Attacks 449 Preparation for Enemy Attack 451 Fire Department Preparation-General 452 The UFO Threat-A Fact 458 Adverse Potential of UFOs 464 UFOs-Emergency Action 469 Conclusion 471 References 471

CHAPTER 14 MASS CASUALTIES AND MASS EVACUATION 474 -------------------------------------------------------------------

Mass Casualties 474 Hazardous Materials Incidents 477 Mass Casualty Priorities 480 Organizing and Managing Mass Casualties 484 National Disaster Medical System 493 Multiple Fatality Incidents 495 Mass Evacuation 498 Evacuation Procedures 500

Fire Officers Guide to Disaster Control

C H A P T E R 1 3

ENEMY ATTACK AND UFO POTENTIAL Few Residents of the United States, except for those in Hawaii, have experienced an enemy attack on their hometown in this century; some think they have. The Great Los Angeles Air Raid of February 26, 1942, began at 2:25 A.M. when the U.S. Army announced the approach of hostile aircraft and the city's air raid warning system went into effect for the first time in World War II. "Suddenly the night was rent by sirens. Searchlights began to sweep the sky. Minutes later gun crews at Army forts along the coast line began snapping on their lights... The din continued for two hours. Finally the guns fell silent. The enemy, evidently, had been routed. Los Angeles began to taste the exhilaration of its first military victory."

WHAT IS WAR?

"War is a man-mad disaster. Earthquakes and floods happen to mankind, but man makes war himself." War is a struggle in which two or more large groups of people try to destroy or conquer each other. There are "hot" wars and there are "cold" wars. When overt acts of aggression involving force are employed, it is a "hot" war, and there was a time in history when such wars were actually declared, but not in the past half-century. However, the United States in each decade since World War II has found itself involved in at least limited military actions. Since the 1940s there have been the Korean "police" action in the 1950s, the Vietnam conflict in the 1960s and 1970s, the Panama invasion, and many other incidents arising showing the possibility of the U.S. becoming involved in another "World" war.

Guard Against Complacency

It is easy for those of us in North America to consider the possibility of enemy attack as being quite remote. While it is true that this continent has not been visited with the death and destruction accompanying past wars, we have found in each generation that wars are all to common and could indeed at some future date involve our country. Certainly many portions of North America are within easy range of enemy nuclear submarines and we could at the least expected time be suddenly involved in a conflict.

The Persian Gulf War served as an example of how quickly the United States can find itself in military conflict. Hence, there is always a need to guard against the complacency that has evolved as our country has enjoyed relative insulation from previous wars.

THE UFO THREAT-A FACT

In this chapter we will now turn our attention to the very real threat posed by Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), whether they exist or not. The well-documented and highly publicized War of the Worlds radio drama by Orson Welles shows how even a perceived existence to alien creatures can cause very real disaster-like conditions and panic among a given populace. In addition, if the apparent visits by alien beings and their space vehicles should pose any type of threat, it will as always be the fire service that is called upon to provide the first line of life-saving defense and disaster mitigation.

On April 25, 1991, radio station KSHE in St. Louis, Missouri, was fined $25,000 by the Federal Communications Commission for broadcasting a mock warning of a nuclear attack during the Persian Gulf War. The seriousness with which the FCC treated this case is indicative of the very real panic that can be created from even illusionary or fictional phenomena. Certainly if these unexplainable events become more prevalent, the possibility of panic could be even greater: and again, the fire department will be the agency called upon to handle the situation. (35) Hence, as we near the year 2000 and move beyond, any comprehensive disaster plan should address the potential for panic and other deleterious effects that might befall a populated area when unexplainable phenomena occur. We will see, as we continue our discussion in this chapter, that widespread blackouts, communication disruptions, and other potentially disastrous conditions have been linked directly to UFO sightings. Hence, fire service leaders who want to ensure that their disaster planning is complete will not neglect an appendix to outline those things that could be done in preparation for the occurrence of such phenomena.

Throughout this book, many of the references to actual events are based on the experiences of both of the authors. However, in this area of UFOs and their potential, we are relying largely on the research and experiences of Charles Bahme. Chuck has made a considerable study of this subject and is acquiring many publications and VCR tapes to augment his library on this and related phenomena. His interest in UFOs was greatly heightened when Congress in 1969 adopted a law (14 CFR Ch. V Part 1211 - Extraterrestrial Exposure) which gave the NASA Administrator the arbitrary discretion to quarantine under armed guard any object, person, or other form of life which has been extraterrestrially exposed. The very fact that our congressmen believed there was a necessity for such drastic authority made Chuck wonder if they had only our astronauts in mind when they adopted it. Could it be applied to anyone who has had a UFO encounter? Whether it has or not is not likely to be a topic for public dissemination.

UFO Discussion-Why Now?

The subject of UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objects) was not included in previous editions of this book. The first edition was the Handbook of Disaster Control which Chuck personally published in 1952 following his release from active naval duty in the Korean War. Although his services in the conflict as Security Coordinator for the Chief of Naval Operations involved the creation of a worldwide disaster control organization for the protection of the physical properties of the Navy, it must be admitted that the directives approved for this new organization did not reflect any significant concern for a flying saucer threat to its shore establishment. That was in the 1950s. Now that we are in the 1990s it is doubtful that the UFO potential would be brushed off so lightly by our military security forces. This change of attitude was evidenced as far back as December 24, 1959, when the Inspector General of the Air Force issued the following Operations and Training Order: "Unidentified Flying Objects-sometimes treated lightly by the press and referred to as 'Flying Saucers'-must be rapidly and accurately identified as serious Air Force business..." (36)

There is no uncertainty about the reality of the war between nations on our planet and the disastrous effects of military actions. The 200 sorties flown every hour against Iraq in the Persian Gulf provided ample evidence of global war's destructive power. On the other hand, there are many persons who may believe that a discussion of the theoretical harm that could be caused by a real or imaginary invasion of UFOs would be "far out!" But this is not so for the thousands of witnesses of unexplained aerial phenomena. To them it is also serious business.

Chuck's interest in UFOs commenced during the early morning hours of August 26, 1942, while he was roller skating from his house to the nearest fire station a few blocks away: the wail of sirens had signaled his recall to fire duty, and with the stringent blackout orders in effect, driving was not wise: besides, it was much more exciting to be out in the open where he could see the spectacular aerial "fireworks" that filled the heavens all around him. Few residents of the U.S. had ever experienced a real or imaginary invasion of UFOs like that which occurred in what has become known as "The Los Angeles Air Raid of 1942." The Army announced the approach of hostile aircraft and the city's air raid warning system went into effect for the first time in World War II. The defense to this "attack" is described in dramatic terms in the opening paragraph of this chapter.

But what enemy had been routed? No one ever knew. All the fire fighters saw in the sky were the 15 or 20 moving "things" which seemed to change course at great speed apparently unaffected by the flak from bursting shells all around them. Rumors that one had been shot down were never verified, nor was the explanation that these zig-zagging invaders were weather balloons ever taken seriously. In any event, for Chuck, that unforgettable episode aroused a continuing interest in UFOs, rivaling his professional fields of law and fire protection. The fact that he subsequently was a member of a group whose sighting of a flight of UFOs was authenticated by airport radar helped to sustain that interest.

UFO Background Information

With no intention of trying to prove or disprove the authenticity of the numerous UFO encounters often related by very credible witnesses including airline and military pilots, astronauts, police officers, fire fighters, members of Congress, and even a U.S. President, the balance of this chapter will present a brief history and nature of UFOs and their alleged occupants: their propulsion origin, and possible motives for continuing reconnaissance.

A quick look at some of the classic accounts of encounters documented in numerous foreign and U.S. publications might help us judge the magnitude of their threat, if any, to social stability, and, if deemed desirable, propose a fire service plan for coping with some of the conceivable catastrophic effects that UFOs could produce on cities and densely populated areas.

For readers who already have made up their minds that there is no such thing as a UFO notwithstanding the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, it should be pointed out that there is circumstantial evidence that disastrous effects have already been attributed to UFO activity in more than one nation, including the United States.

UFOs-What Are They?

William Shakespeare put a fitting observation in the mouth of Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, that went like this: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamed of in your philosophy." Whether Hamlet was referring to those strange lights or objects that appear in the sky or near the ground and have no known cause, we will never know, but the World Book Encyclopedia defines such things as UFOs. (37)

Several theories have been propounded as to what they might be. Some scientists believe that they are of extraterrestrial origin-coming from other planets. Military officers conjecture that they might be alien aircraft. Some attribute them all to natural causes, such as meteors, comets, sun dogs, light reflections, marsh gas, ball lighting, even though they must admit that scientists cannot explain all UFO reports in that manner. Still others are inclined to believe that they may be forms from other dimensions which can materialize and dematerialize at will perhaps by making a wavelength or frequency transition so as to become invisible to humans. Some believe they are time travelers from the future.

UFO Classification System

Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Northern University Professor Emeritus of Astronomy and an advisor to the Air Force's Blue Book Project, adopted a very simple classification system based solely upon the manner of observation:

1. Nocturnal lights 2. Daylight disks 3. Close encounters (day or night) 4. Radar readings.

He concluded that this system tells us nothing about the nature of the UFOs, but can suggest a means for gathering data.(38) He found that while a large number of such reports were readily identifiable by trained investigators as misconceptions of known objects or events, a small residue (about 1,000) were not. These came from credible witnesses from such widely separated places as Canada, Australia, South America, and Antarctica. He concludes with: "Although I know of no hypothesis that adequately covers the mountainous evidence, this should not and must not deter us from following the advice of Schroedinger: to be curious, capable of being astonished, and eager to find out." (39) Dr. Hynek has an excellence, well-illustrated article on UFOs in a 1982 book which gives a detailed history of the UFO sightings, together with the reports of some well-known people who made them, including President Jimmy Carter while governor of Georgia. (40)

Shapes of UFOs

Witnesses have described the shapes of UFOs as anything varying from a sphere to a boomerang. Some have resembled flying saucers with a lid: others a glowing tube: some as semi-spherical with colored apertures: some with reddish-orange glows, or fire-like or sparking discharges. Incredible speed and maneuverabilities not attainable by aircraft of any kind are commonly observed. Many of the books and articles in Appendix H have excellent photographs of these unexplained visitors-photos that have been checked by experts for their authenticity.

History of UFOs

For hundreds of years mysterious objects in the sky and strange moving lights have been reported by many people, including the military pilots in World War II who called them foo fighters. ("Where there's Foo, there's Fire"). In the middle of the 1900s flying saucers were increasingly observed in the United States and other countries. Scientists at the University of Colorado hired by the Air Force from 1966 to 1968 to study this type of aerial phenomena could explain most of the UFO reports as a star (Venus), meteor, planet, balloon, rocket, artificial satellite, etc. Sometimes atmospheric conditions, aircraft exhaust trails, or unusual lighting conditions may produce optical illusions that observers thought were UFOs. After investigating more than 12,000 reports, the U.S. Air Force was unable to explain where the unexplained UFOs come from, but apparently concluded that the national security was not threatened by them. (41) The emphasis of the university's team headed by Edward U. Condon, seemed to be more concerned with the establishment of the emotional stability or instability of those who reported the sightings than with other evidence.

Psychiatrists have examined the witnesses who claimed to have encountered UFOs and even been taken aboard their craft, such as the two shipyard workers in Mississippi, and found that they are not unbalanced people. (42) "They're not crackpots. There was definitely something here that was not terrestrial." (43)

Dr. J. Allen Hynek agreed, and added, "Where they are coming from and why they are here is a matter of conjecture, but the fact that they were here on this planet is beyond a reasonable doubt." (44)

The Air Force, after 20 years of being deluged with UFO sightings and spending millions of dollars on their investigation, decided to drop the inquiry business and turned the project over to a Kensington, Maryland, group called NICAP (National Investigation Committee on Aerial Administration) with part of the task of trying to run UFO sighting reports, including many by its own Apollo and Skylab astronauts. By 1974 over a score of astronauts saw and photographed UFOs during their flights beyond the earth's atmosphere.

Early in the Apollo II mission, which culminated in the moon walk, astronauts Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin, and Michael Collins reported sightings of what seemed to be a UFO during the first half of their flight to the lunar surface. There were many more sightings by U.S. and Soviet Astronauts. On November 11, 1966, Gemini XII Astronauts Jim Lovell and Edwin Aldrin said that they saw four UFOs linked together, and on October 12, 1964, three Russian astronauts aboard Voskod reported that they were surrounded by a "formation of fast-moving disc-shaped objects." (45)

UFO Organizations

In addition to NICAP, some of the other organizations that study UFO phenomena are MUFON (Mutual UFO Networks), CAUS (Citizens Against UFO Secrecy), GSW (Ground Saucer Watch), CUFOS (the Center for UFO Studies), and APRO (Aerial Phenomena Research Organization), an Arizona nonprofit scientific and educational organization, founded in 1952. (46)

Why the Secrecy?

In their book UFOs Over America, authors Jim and Carol Lorenzo charge that the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) has been closely involved in the collection and suppression of UFO information. "Witnesses to the phenomena have been bribed, coerced, and threatened by the CIA, who wanted valuable evidence given to them alone." (47) One reason given is that military intelligence may view the UFOs as a tool of either a known or unknown potential enemy. "If these vehicles prove evasive and surreptitious, all the more reason to suspect them...the probability looms large that the minds behind these vehicles may well be gathering intelligence of their own." (48)

Another reason for secrecy may lie in the hope of obtaining knowledge relating to advanced propulsion methods and anti-gravity systems before other potential enemies on earth may acquire it. Hence, though many nations are secretly investigating UFOs, they are reluctant to share their findings. Robert Lofton, in his book Identified Flying Saucers, claims that the Air Force became the "goat" in the effort of the CIA to debunk many sightings by pilots, radar technicians, and reliable civilian observers. He thinks that the suppression of information about how dangerous UFOs can be is wrong. After citing a case where a child was burned over 50 to 60 percent of her body by a low flying UFO and then taken to an Air Force hospital, no one would explain why her clothes were not burned at the same time. He also describes another burn case in New Mexico and another man who recently received a sledge-hammer like blow that knocked him unconscious by the force field of a 100-foot diameter UFO. "The public ought to be told the danger! . . . Nothing helps rumors and panic more than ignorance." (49)

Major Donald Kehoe describes in his book Aliens from Space, The Real Story of Unidentified Flying Objects the difficulties he had in 1957 in trying to get the truth from government agencies after he was director of NICAP, the world's largest UFO research organization with over 30 subcommittees in the U.S. and abroad. (50)

According to some UFOlogists the attempts at cover-up by the CIA extend to destruction of evidence that it could not confiscate. Apparently some of our nation's important leaders have been denied access to some UFO secrets in the possession of an agency of the United States, the very existence of which is classified above top secret. (51) Senator Barry Goldwater, a retired Air Force Reserve Brigadier General and pilot with many decades of flying experience, was quoted as saying "I certainly believe in aliens in space. They may not look like us, but I have very strong feelings that they have advanced beyond our mental capabilities." He said he was refused permission to check the Air Force files on UFOs and added. "I think some highly secret government UFO investigations are going on that we don't know about-and probably never will unless the Air Force discloses them." (52) He said that he put faith in the reports of the Air Force, Navy, and commercial pilots who reported instances where a UFO would fly near them- right off their plane's wing-and then just zoom away at incredible speeds. "I remember the case in Georgia in the 1950s of a National Guard plane going after a UFO and never returning. And I recall the case in Franklin, Kentucky, when four military planes investigated a UFO. One of them exploded in midair and no one knows why." (53)

Unleashed by the policy of Glasnost (greater openness) the Soviet media felt free to include accounts of UFO sightings. A Tass report of October 10, 1989, reported a large shiny ball or disk hovering over a Voronezh park; residents saw the UFO land and three creatures similar to human beings emerged, accompanied by a robot. (54)

Apparently the Russians felt no need to suppress this report which was poked fun at in Newsweek and Time magazines (55) but not in U.S. News and World Report: "A scant few decades ago, both the U.S. government and the media treated flying objects as no laughing matter-which even Congress looked into. In 1966 Representative Ford responded to a rash of sightings in his home state of Michigan by calling for, and getting, a House hearing on UFOs." (56)

UFO Missions

Many reasons have been advanced for the purpose of the UFOs visits to our planet. Although some of the persons who apparently have been the subjects of genetic investigation, such as the family of Whitley Streiber may not agree, the majority of those who have studied possible UFO visitors feel that they are friendly. Mr. Streiber described his experience as terrifying, and believes that these "little figures with eyes that seem to stare into the deepest core of being are asking for something. Whatever it is, it is more than simple information. The goal does not seem to be a sort of clear and open exchange that we might expect; whatever may be surfacing, it wants far more than that. It seems to me that it seeks the very depth of soul; it seeks communion." (57)

From the thousands of reports he has studied, William Spaulding, aerospace engineer and head of the Arizona-based Ground Saucer Watch, believes that a pattern indicates that UFOs are here on a surveillance mission; the fact that a majority of sightings occur around our military installations, research and development areas leads to the conclusion that a methodical study is being made of the earth and its defensive and offensive capabilities. "The phenomena is not unlike our own space explorations:scout ship survey: soil samples: landing." (58)

In his book Incident at Exeter. John Fuller discusses the seemingly affinity of UFOs for electrical power lines in the northeastern part of the United States. In a later section of this chapter dealing with the effects of UFOs on our terrestrial activities, we will see how this affinity may have been responsible for causing 36 million people to lose power over an area of 8,000 square miles. (59)

Because of our recent adventures into space, there are some who speculate that UFOs are more concerned with what we will do there, than in settling here. In any event, the Air Force's official publication (issued by the Government Printing Office 1968) called Flying Objects says that "No UFO has been determined to represent a threat to our national security." That conclusion, however should not rule out less disastrous consequences than the overthrow of our government.

ADVERSE POTENTIAL OF UFOS

Regardless of its past evaluations, the Air Force could be wrong about a number of things. "It can't even guess within a couple of billion dollars what one of its planes is going to cost: maybe, despite skepticism of the scientists and other investigators, the UFOs sent from other planets do exist and have visited earth." (60) And maybe they have exhibited some destructive effects, whether or not intentionally in ever instance, which we need to consider when drafting a plan for coping with an emergency situation where UFOs are involved. Some of these documented effects are as follows.

UFO Hazards

The two principal hazards noted with relation to UFOs have been attributed to powerful electrical fields which they can project in a general populace or individual contacts.

Force Field Impact

The disruption of air and ground travel has often been reported in the presence of UFOs. The ignition systems of auto and aircraft engines have apparently been affected by energized force fields to such an extent as to stop their operation: the headlights and radios have also ceased to function. Here are a couple of examples. In Buenos Aires, on March 29, 1978, "A strange force shut off their engine and headlights of their Citroen CG, lifted it 15 feet off the road, then set it down a minute later and 75 miles to the north." The driver had noticed a yellow and violet light shining in his rear view mirror while driving the last leg of a long stock car race, and he realized that it was approaching too fast to be a competitor. A month later a Colombian bank manager and a navy officer had their car headlights go off when buzzed by a UFO, with the navy man suffering temporary paralysis. Other South American countries in which similar actions were reported around that time included Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Uruguay. (61)

These effects have also been noted to influence the controls and instruments of aircraft, e.g., the pilot of a Piper PH-24 reported that his controls became inoperable when he was approached by three disk-shaped objects, 10 to 12 feet in diameter, over Mexico City on May 3, 1975. (62) Similar cases have been reported by military pilots, illustrated by the classic case of the near mid-air collision of an army helicopter with a UFO on October 18, 1973, over Ohio, where not only did both the UHF and VHF radio wavelengths go dead temporarily, but the downward movement of the helicopter with its four occupants was levitated upward by a green beam from the UFO in time to prevent its crash into the ground. (63)

Communications Disruption

In addition to the impedance of radio transmissions and reception, such as that described in the preceding incident, telephone interference has occurred, illustrated by the chagrin of President Lyndon Johnson in having his conversation from the Texas White House cut off while talking to assistants in Washington, D.C. (64) The ability to render inoperable all electronic forms of communications, including those that control the launching of defense weapons systems, has been considered within the range of UFO capability. Whether this could extend to the erasing of recorded computer data such as bank records, personnel data, FBI, CIA, and NSA files, along with critical information of every kind, is not beyond the realm of possibility.

Regional Power Blackouts

It has long been suspected that UFOs have the capability of blacking out a city, state, or many states by exerting a force field sufficient to overload the circuits of public and private utility installations. "Few things are more disturbing than to be plunged into pitch darkness without warning: it is dangerous for masses of people. It paralyzes cities, blocks highways, stops trains, leaves elevators suspended between floors. In general it simply plays hell with the modern way of life." (65) You would think that the power companies would have achieved sufficient reliability in their high tech systems that a mass failure such as that which blacked out New York and New England in 1965 would never happen-but it did. Although, as we have mentioned before, it was known that UFO activity was associated with disturbances with compasses, instruments, ignition systems, radios, etc., it was inconceivable that it could also interfere with generation and disturbance of electrical power. Such a connection was also inferred in November 1953, when a glowing red object went over a residential area of New Haven, Connecticut, causing lights to dim out on both sides of the object's path and them come on when it went out of sight.

Power failures were also reported in association with UFOs in Brazil in 1957 to 1959, Rome, Italy, in 1958: and Mexico in 1965. Likewise, in Uberlandia, where the power station operators promptly closed the circuits when the UFO apparently caused them to open, it did no good, and they were unable to restore the power until the UFO departed.

"The Granddaddy of all blackouts to date was the stygian blanket that fell over 30 million people in the northeastern corner of the U.S. during the early evening rush hour period on November 9, 1965." (66) Relay services that were supposed to automatically transfer the load in case of failure in one area to an alternate source malfunctioned. Military communications relying on public power without alternate backup systems also failed, but communications were operable to make a quick public announcement that there was no military emergency. Though it was largely over by the next morning, the official explanation about a malfunctioning small device in a Canadian hydroelectric generating plant never accounted for the failure of millions of dollars worth of electronic devices to shift the load when the breakdown occurred.

Fireballs Over Syracuse-The Blackout Connection

Airplane pilots reported that UFOs were being chased across Pennsylvania about 4:30 P.M., and electronics and construction engineers about 5:30 P.M., just prior to the Great Blackout. A veteran flight instructor who had been flying over Syracuse on a training flight say a glowing globe over the power lines leading the Niagara Falls generating plant. Hundreds of others saw the glowing object in the sky on the night of the big power failure.

That was on November 9th. On December 2nd, about 700,000 persons in Texas, New Mexico, and Mexico also had their power fail. It was said to have originated in a regular failure in El Paso: then on December 5th, three nights later, 40,000 homes plus military installations in the area of East Texas were also blacked out-overloaded! Missile grounds (White Sands), Fort Bliss, Holloman Air Force Base, and numerous airports were all blacked out (with no emergency power backup), and this was when President Johnson's telephone call to the White House in Washington D.C. was cut off. In response to his request for an explanation, President Johnson was told that his calls were fed into a cable system that went dead when the surge of power caused by the El Paso regulator blow-up hit it, and the backup batteries didn't work. Though it may be debatable whether the above cases of electrical transmission failure were merely coincidences with UFO activity, an incident on April 18, 1962, involving a UFO that had been tracked from New York, through Kansas to Eureka, Utah, was well documented. The Air Force spokesman admitted that the object had landed, and during the 42 minutes that it was on the ground near the power station there was no power, but it was restored when the UFO left. The object was pursued by jet interceptors summoned from Phoenix and Stead Field in Reno until it exploded over the Mesquite Range in Nevada in a brilliant glare that was visible over five states. (67)

UFOs-The Panic Hazard

The second major disastrous effect that UFO activity, real or imagined, can have on the populace, is the creation of fear, panic, flight, and all kinds of irrational behavior. We have mentioned already the rather well-documented case of hysterical contagion and mass hysteria created by War of the Worlds, the radio drama by Orson Welles about an invasion of Martians. It was broadcast on Halloween of 1938 during the period of the invasions of Germany into Austria and Japan into China. "The drama, realistically presented in the form of news bulletins and interviews concerning an alien spaceship landing in New Jersey, resulted in many kinds of hysterical actions, including thousands of panic-stricken phone calls, wildly fleeing automobiles, and impromptu shot gun brigades." (68)

Though most persons reporting UFOs do not interpret them as personal threats, it is possible that some of the large volume of reports may be attributable to hysterical contagion. In any case, one of the reasons often cited for the tight secrecy on government UFO research findings is the need to prevent the possible panic that a revelation of the truth might arouse. Rumors that people were being abducted, dematerialized, burned, made radioactive, rounded up and impounded, liquidated with ray guns and lasers or shipped off to Mars or Venus might well give rise to fear-fear of the unknown. Hysteria could cause frightened persons to imagine that their water was poisoned, the air contaminated with undetectable but lethal aerosols or nerve gases. With hundreds of UFO squadrons zooming across the landscape from California to New York, Toronto to Mexico City, communications disrupted, widespread power failures, airports and railroads paralyzed, highways turned into giant parking lots of immobilized vehicles full of terrified motorists, the problem of restoring order and sanity would be a tremendous challenge to all of the emergency services, assuming their personnel would remain calm, detached, and able to resist the human impulse to put the safety and well being of their own families ahead of the public's. To make matters worse, some of the more excitable gun owners might be tempted to rush out Rambo fashion, and in utter disregard of the damage that falling bullets might cause innocent residents below their fallout, start firing at the evasive objects regardless of the range.

Personal Hazards-Physiological

The force field affects on the physical environment communication, transportation, illumination, and computerized data storage-have already been considered. We might have added that some physical effects have been observed at locations where UFOs have landed-circular patterns of crops destroyed by heat or radiation and baking or sterilization of the soil at the site.

On a more practical basis there may be grounds for concern that more than just the environment can be adversely affected by UFO actions. While pursuing UFOs, military aircraft have disappeared in mid-air, exploded, and suffered harassment. Persons on the ground have sustained serious burns, paralysis, and "blows" from a force field, radiated emissions, or rays and beams that have been described like that of a "stun-gun" (69)

In 1980, three witnesses saw a red ball of light hovering above houses in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, when suddenly a bolt of blue light shot down and two houses burst into flames. (70) An Indiana man saw a bright light flash pass his window: the power went off in his house so he went outside to investigate and found a brilliantly lit object hovering above him: when he started to walk toward it his body commenced to tingle and he was unable to move until the object disappeared. A similar tingling sensation swept over another man in Lynn, Massachusetts, one night when he approached a domed object with a red glowing cone rising from a parking lot. He too was immobile until the object moved out of sight. Some believe that even animals may be at risk by UFOs: in trying to account for the death of 15 ponies, the leader of an investigative team believed they were crushed by the anti-gravity field of a flying saucer as it took off.(71)

Thus, UFOs may not only have the power to control some of our military and industrial establishment's highly technical scientific hardware, they may also possess the ability to impose pain and control over people who attempt to attack them, even to the extent of "liquidating" them in one way or another.

UFOS-EMERGENCY ACTION

In view of the fact that many UFOlogists believe that we are fast approaching a time when overt landings of UFOs will become less remarkable, and in the absence of our knowing whether their visits are friendly or hostile, it would not be remiss to give some thought to the part that fire departments might play in the event of the unexpected arrival of UFOs in their communities. For example, what would be your course of action as an incident commander at the scene of a school ground where a UFO has crashed into the boiler room, rupturing a fuel line, and ignition has occurred in the spilling oil, endangering the occupants of the craft who are trapped in the wreckage? If your rescue attempts are successful, and two of the five small alien creatures are injured but still alive, how do you dispose of the dead and treat the survivors? How would the presence of children on the school grounds affect your actions? What persons and agencies would be notified?

The authors have never read any advice on these matters. The following admonition was printed on the inside from jacket of Frank Edward's book on flying saucers:

WARNING

"Near approaches of UFOs can be harmful to human beings. Do not stand under a UFO that is hovering at low altitude. Do not touch or attempt to touch a UFO that has landed. In either case the safe thing to do is to get away from there very quickly and let the military take over. There is a possibility of radiation danger and there are known cases where persons have been burned by rays emanating from UFOs. Don't take chances with UFOs!"

In view of the federal law (cited earlier) empowering NASA's administrator to impound, without a hearing, anyone who touches a UFO or its occupants, it would be inadvisable to make personal contact unless you are willing to submit to NASA's quarantine requirements, should the law be invoked.

Besides the possible physical effects of approaching a UFO, e.g., burns, radiation, etc., there may be psychological effects produced by force fields that could induce a hypnotic states in the viewer, loss of consciousness, memory relapse, and submission to the occupants. Jacques Valle, author of The Invisible College cautions that we should consider psychic effects, such as space-time distortions experienced by percipients of craft-like devices which appear to fade away-dematerialize-and then reappear: of alien, strange voices or thoughts that may effect involuntary changes in the manner in which witnesses may react in such circumstances. (72)

Perhaps the above warning of Edwards and Vallee are a little too cautious and apprehensive to adopt as a general pattern of conduct in every situation. In the absence of overt acts indicating hostility, there may be no danger in approaching a landing (or landed) UFO with a positive, solicitous attitude of wanting to be of service. This nonaggressive mental state may be telepathically sensed by those aboard or emerging from the craft: a form of non vocal communication is a possibility. It goes without saying that any display of firearms or other weapons on your part could be construed as unfriendly and likely to thwart your intention of conveying a helpful attitude.

In a best case scenario, you may be able to obtain guidance as to the appropriate actions to take, whether of a life-saving nature, e.g., in quelling a fire, abating a spill, and of preservation of property, or even in the reduction of apprehension on the part of your response team and the spectators.

In a less optimistic scenario, you may have engine trouble upon approaching the scene, and radio contact could be lost with your dispatcher. If at night, your headlights could go out, the city could be blacked out, and your portable generators may malfunction when you attempt to use them for fans and portable lights. It would certainly be an inopportune time for your comrades to announce that they had decided to take their pensions, effective immediately.

In any event, the incident could provide invaluable experience for further training in coping with rare and difficult emergencies. Whatever "inside" information you are able to pass along to your fellow officers and citizens of the world might help to alleviate unreasonable fear, so that there would be less likelihood that we would ever again experience the panic and hysteria that was created by War of the Worlds a half century ago. Truth is the best cure for the unknown. A list of some of the available books on Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) is found in Appendix H.

CONCLUSION

Some fire chiefs have little confidence in disaster plans, especially those dealing with UFOs or enemy attack. If you develop a plan that sets forth your responsibilities, resources, organizations, supplies, information, telephone numbers, and special data that will be useful in obtaining help and fulfilling your role in disaster control, commit it to an electronic medium, a computer with a capability for continuous updating through modern word processing. Bring it forth when the need requires. With a good plan, good leadership, and adequate resources, you may save many lives in any disaster, including attack from possible enemies.

CHAPTER 13 REFERENCES

1. Smith, Jack. "The Night L.A. Bombed." Los Angeles Times, September 9, 1975, Part I. p. 1.

2. World Book Encyclopedia. Volume 21. p. 21. Chicago, IL Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, 1976.

3. Cloud, Stanley W. "Gathering Storm" in Time, September 3, 1990. pp. 24-28.

4. "Secret History of the War" in Newsweek, March 18, 1991. p. 28.

5. "Snubbing People Power" in U.S. News & World Report, April 8, 1991, p. 38

6. World Book Encyclopedia, Vol. 21. p. 22. Field Enterprises Educational Corporation. Chicago IL 1976

7. "Preparing for Iraqi Chemical Warfare." photo and story in Time, September 3, 1990. p. 26.

8. "Steel Rain" in Newsweek, March 18, 1991. p. 31.

9. See note 2, volume 9. p. 416.

10. See Chapter 8 for a more in-depth discussion of terrorism.

11. Gilliam, J. "A-Bomb Materials Can Be Stolen, Expert Says." Los Angeles Times, December 11, 1975. Part II. p. 1.

12. Nuclear Blackmail Emergency Response Plan for the State of California, Officer of Emergency Service, State of California, June 1976.

13. "After the Storm" in Newsweek, March 11, 1991. pp. 26-29.

14. Nuclear Attack and Industrial Survival, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Special Report, 1962, p. 52.

15. Willenson, K., and L. Norman. "Missiles on the Move" in Newsweek, February 16, 1976, p. 42.

16. CBS News broadcast, April 1991.

17. Disaster Planning Guide for Business and Industry, Defense Civil Preparedness Agency, 1974, p. 7, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

18. L.A. Postal Report, Volume 10, No. 9, April 23, 1965, p.2, Los Angeles, CA.

19. Worldwide Effects of Nuclear War-Some Perspectives, a Report of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1975. p. 5, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

20. Ibid. p. 6.

21. "Turning Up the Heat on the Greenhouse" in Newsweek, April 22, 1991. p. 69.

22. See note 19, p. 6.

23. See note 19, p. 5.

24. "Deadly Meltdown" in Time, May 12, 1986, p. 39.

25. "A Big 50' for Pearl Harbor in USA Today, Thursday, May 9, 1991. p. 3A.

26. Bahme, Charles W. Fire Officer's Guide To Disaster Control, 1st ed. Boston, MA NFPA 1978, p. 340.

27. Fire Effects of Bombing Attacks, Technical Manual 9-2, October 1959, Office of Civil Defense Mobilization, U.S.> Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

28. Fire Aspects of Civil Defense, TR-25, Office of Civil Defense, July 1968, p. 4. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.

29. World Book Encyclopedia, 1991. 30. Disaster Operations, Defense Civil Preparedness Agency, 1972. p. 29, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

31. Bruno, Hal. "The Wait May Be Over at FEMA" in Firehouse, Vol. 15, No. 5 (May 1990) p. 10.

32. See note 30, p. 40.

33. The U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. has several publications available as of 1991 which suggest measures that can be taken to safeguard dwellings and other buildings, in preparation for a nuclear attack; they illustrate the relative protection afforded for fallout radiation by various types of construction and in various locations within a building. Two available from the U.S. Government Printing Office, are Fallout Protection and In Time of Emergency, both Office of Civil Defense.

34. Weldon, Curt. "The Fight for Fire Protection" in Firehouse, Vol. 16, No. 4 (April 1991), p. 20.

35. Radio Broadcast on station KSHE, St. Louis, MO, reported on April 25, 1991.

36. Edwards, Frank. Flying Saucers-Serious Business, NY: Lyle Stuart, 965, p. 315.

37. World Book Encyclopedia, World Book Inc., 1988, Vol. 20, p. 19.

38. Sagan, Carl, and Thornton Page. UFOs-A Scientific Debate, Cornell Univ., 1972, p. 44.

39. Ibid. p. 51.

40. Readers Digest, Mysteries Of The Unexplained, p. 219.

41. Steiger, Brad, Editor. Project Blue Book, NY: Ballantine Books, 1976, p. 170.

42. Uphoff, Walter and Mary Jo, New Psychic Frontiers, Colin Smyth Ltd., 1975, p. 152.

43. Ibid., quoting Dr. James Harder, University of California.

44. Ibid. p. 152.

45. Macomber, Frank. "UFOs Spotted by Astronauts Still Haven't Been Identified," Santa Cruz Sentinel, April 17, 1974, p. 30.

46. APRO's address was given as 3910 E. Kleindale Rd., Tuscon, Arizona, 85716

47. Lorenzen, Jim and Coral. UFOs Over America, NY: Signet, 1968, pp. 182 et seq.

48. Ibid. p. 186.

49. Lofton, Robert, Identified Flying Saucers, NY: David McKay Co., 1968, p. 86.

50. Kehoe, Donald, Major. Aliens From Space, The Real Story of the UFOs, New York: Doubleday, 1972.

51. Friedman, Stanton. Cosmic Watergate, New Realities, 1979: Hynek, J. Allen, "UFOs," This World, Aug. 30, 1981, p. 13.

52. Zullo, Allan A. "I Believe That Earth Has Been Visited By Creatures From Outer Space," National Enquirer, December 1973.

53. Ibid. p. 2.

54. Press Democrat, October 10, 1989, p. A-5; also reported in weekly news magazines; see notes 22 and 23.

55. Time, October 23, 1989; Newsweek, October 30, 1989; UFO update, Omni, January 1990.

56. U.S. News & World Report, "UFOs in Uncle Sam's Closet," October 23, 1989. p. 19.

57. Streiber, Whitley. Communion, NY: William Morrow, 1987, p. 15.

58. Adamski, George, Inside the Flying Saucers, NY: Paperback LIbrary, 1967, p. 11.

59. Fuller, John. Incident at Exeter, cited in UFO Update, in New Realities, 1978, p. 52.

60. "Shooting Down The Flying Saucers," Los Angeles Times, December 15, 1959, Pt. II, p. 5.

61. Boudreaux, Richard. "South Americans Take UFOs Seriously," Los Angeles Times, November 29, 1978, Pt. VI. p. 7.

62. See note 6, p. 224.

63. Randles, Jenny. The UFO Conspiracy, NY: Sterling Pub. Co., 1990, p. 105.

64. See note 1, p. 267.

65. See note 1, p. 255.

66. Ibid. p. 259.

67. Ibid. p. 269.

68. See note 4, p. 216.

69. Blundell, Nigel, and Roger Boar. The World's Greatest UFO Mysteries, NY: Berkley Books, 1990, p. 175.

70. Ibid. p. 176.

71. Ibid. p. 179.

72. Valle, Jacques. The Invisible College, NY: E. P. Dutton, 1975, p. 6.

APPENDIX H: BIBLIOGRAPHY ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFOs)

Above Top Secret, Timothy Good, WIlliam Morrow, NY, 1988.

Aids to Identification of Flying Objects, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Gov't Printing Office, Supt. Doc., 1966.

Aliens AMong Us, Ruth Montgomery, Fawcett Crest, NY, 1985.

Aliens from Space-The Real Story of UFOs, Donald E. Keyhoe, Doubleday, NY, 1972.

Beyond Earth: Man's Contact with UFOs, Ralth and Judy Blum, Bantam Books, NY, 1974.

Breakthrough to Creativity, Shafica Karakulla, M.D., De Vorss and Co., Marina Del Re, CA, 1967.

Chariots of the Gods, Erich Von Daniken, Putnam, NY, 1970.

Clear Intent, Barry Greenfield, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1987.

Communion, Whitley Streiber, WIlliam Morrow, NY, 1987.

Extraterrestrial Visitations from Prehistoric Times to the Present, Henry Regnery Co., Chicago, 1970.

Flying Saucers-Letters to the Air Force on UFOs, Bill Adler, Dell Books, NY, 1967.

Identified FLying Saucers, Robert Lofton, David McKay Co., NY, 1968.

In Search of Extra Terrestrials, Alan Landsburn, Bantam Books, NY, 1967.

Inside the Flying Saucers, George Adamski, Paperback Library, NY, 1967.

Insights for the Age of Aquarius, Gina Cerminara, Theosophical Pub. House, Wheaton, IL, 1973.

Mysteries of the Unexplained, Readers Digest, REaders Digest Assn., Pleasantville, NY, 1982.

New Psychic Frontiers, Walter and Mary Jo Uphoff, Colin Smythe Ltd., and Bolger Pubs., Minneapolis, MN, 1975.

Project Blue Book, Brad Steiger, Editor, Ballantine, NY, 1976.

Strange World, Frank Edwards, Lyle Stuart, NY, 1965.

Strangers Among Us, Ruth Montgomery, Fawcett Crest, NY, 1979.

The Intruders, Budd HOpkins, Random House, NY, 1987.

The Invisible College, Jacques Vallee, E.P. Dutton, NY, 1975

The Possibility of Intelligent Life Elsewhere in the Universe, U.S. House Committee on Science and Technology, Govt. Printing Office, 1975.

The Roswell Incident, WIlliam I. Moore, Grosset and Dunlap, 1980.

The UFO Conspiracy-The First Forty Years, Jenny Randles, Sterling Pub. Co., 1989.

The Unexplained, Allen Spraggett, Signet, NY, 1967.

The World's Greatest UFO Mysteries, Nigel Blundell and Roger Boar, Berkeley Book, 1990.

The World's Last Mysteries, Readers Digest, Pleasantville, NY, 1978.

UFO Abductions, Philip Klass, Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY. 1989.

UFO . . . Contact from the Pleiades, Lee and Brit Elders, Genesis III Pub. Co., Phoenix AZ, 1984.

UFOs From Behind the Iron Curtain, Ian Hobana and Julien Weverbergh, Bantam Books, NY, 1975.

UFOs Over the Americas, Jim and Coral Lorenzen, Signet Books, NY, 1968.

UFOs-A Scientific Debate, Carl Sagan and Thornton Page, Cornell University, NY, 1972.

We Are Not The First, Andrew Thomas, Putnam & Sons, NY, 1971.

=============================================================================

ARTICLE 5

THE MARCH ON WASHINGTON

UFOlogists Go Political

Editor s Note: UFOlogists from across the nation grabbed picket signs and took to the streets of Washington to let the U.S. government know that they are tired of the secrecy surrounding UFOs and don't plan to take it any longer.

A group of about 100 protested in the 98 degree heat of July 5th and were led by a relatively new organization called "The Right to Know," organized for the sole purpose of making the voices of "reason" heard within the halls of Congress. Directed by Ed Komarek of Thomasville, Georgia, the group met directly across the street from the White House in a neighboring park to listen to speeches from luminaries in the field, including the likes of Fate magazine columnist and UFO Universe Contributing Editor Antonio Huneeus, long time UFO research veteran Larry Bry. UFOs converged on White House during flap of 1952, though it did nothing to convince the Pentagon that they should "come clean" on a matter of a massive cover-up. This is an office photo of the radar screen at Washington International Airport showing the objects as they converge on their target.

Bry, who has waged a one-man war against Capital Hill's UFO censorship policy, and yours truly, who reminded the eager protesters that this was not the first time the subject of flying saucers were of particular attention to those living in the District of Columbia. I reminded those attending the rally that back in 1952 strange objects were seen for several days in a row coming and going over the White House, were picked up on radar, and were chased by our fastest planes at the time. Even President Truman took to the airwaves to tell the nation's frightened citizenry not to worry, that the Air Force was doing its job. Truman--like other presidents before and since--downplayed the seriousness of the situation and dismissed UFOs as hallucinations and hoaxes.

But times have changed. And it looks like Operation Right to Know may be the first successful group to take to the streets to protest what they see as a grand cosmic whitewash that has involved the last eight presidents. Those wishing to learn more about the forthcoming activities of the Right to Know group should contact Ed Komarek at Route 3, Box 1076, Thomasville, GA 31792. And, by the way, donations are welcome to support the cause just like they would be to any charitable group.

If the leadership of the UFO community lacks the courage, assertiveness and spunk needed to end the UFO cover-up quickly then they should step aside and make way for others that will. If this does not happen, then they will be superseded by new organizations and new leaders. This is, in fact, already happening around the country as memberships grow tired of all the fussing and squabbling and the mutual admiration societies that exist within the UFO establishment.

UFO picketers strut their stuff in front of the White House as they are led by abductes Minder Gerber and Pat Marcattilio.

Why We Marched by Ed Komarek

The spectacular success of Operation Right to Know's second annual UFO demonstration in Washington, DC shows what a few committed people can do. Unfortunately, the demonstration would have been a bigger success if the UFO community had not undermined our efforts in this regard. The UFO establishment has become extremely conservative and unwilling to experiment and take risks. It seems that the leaders of the UFO establishment prefer to sit on their laurels content to hold on to what they have accomplished so far. Even worse, they undermine the efforts of others like ORTK who are willing to experiment, take risks and learn from both the successes and failures. It was very irresponsible for the UFO establishment to come down against demonstrating when it had never been done before.

It seems to me that the leaders of the UFO establishment have failed to learn from their adversaries who know that the media are the eyes and ears of the public. The battle for freedom of inquiry by the public is carried out in the media. It is essential to get the media on our side in order to get our message to the public. This message is to look at the evidence. If the people will not look at the evidence because of the debunking groups and the tabloid press, then what good is the evidence. If the UFO establishment is really serious about ending the UFO cover-up, they must realize that the UFO/ET problem is first and foremost a political problem, and thus deserves a political solution. What good is science if the data is being manipulated because of politics.

I suggest that the various UFO groups get together immediately and form a public relations committee to publicize the evidence.

First and foremost on this committee's agenda should be to publicize an event like "UFO Awareness Week" by distributing press releases to every media source in the country about three weeks before the event. Speakers should be lined up to talk to the press and present the evidence for UFO/ET's and the massive UFO cover-up. Operation Right To Know has taken the lead and now it is up to the UFO community to follow that leadership. We need aggressive, assertive leadership that stands up to irresponsible reporting on the UFO/ET situation by the media.

Our demonstration in front of the Washington Post protesting their unwillingness to look at the evidence while attempting to make ORTK out to be a radical organization put them in their place. As expected, a competitor paper, the Wall Street Journal, ran an article that forced the Washington Post to admit Surrounded by picket signs, Tim Biweekly addresses the multitude from a stage directly across the street from Bill Clinton's home as reporter Hal MacKinsey looks on.

that the evidence was provocative and they were looking into the UFO/ET matter. This should be an example to the UFO community not to roll over and play dead when ridiculed in the press. ORTK again has taken a leadership position and the UFO community should begin to aggressively deal with irresponsible reporting by the press.

If the leadership of the UFO community lacks the courage, assertiveness and spunk needed to end the UFO cover-up quickly then they should step aside and make way for others that will. If this does not happen, then they will be superseded by new organizations and new leaders. This is, in fact, already happening around the country as memberships grow tired of all the fussing and squabbling and the mutual admiration societies that exist within the UFO establishment.

ORTK will continue to use all means possible that are legal and non-disruptive to end the UFO cover-up. We will do this with or without the support of the UFO establishment. Obviously we would like the overwhelming support of the UFO community. ORTK has just begun a long process that is essentially a civil rights movement. Like the civil rights movement for the freedom of black people that began when a few individuals stood up for their rights, so are we of ORTK doing the same. Both movements have arisen out of a simmering discontent that a few courageous individuals catalyzed into political action.

From Truman to Clinton: Presidents and Cosmic Watergate

by Dan Pinchas

In light of President Clinton's recent inauguration, it is worth reviewing what evidence exists concerning our presidents' knowledge of"the cosmic Watergate". Due to the extremely high level of secrecy concerning the U.S. investigation of UFOs and "IACs" (Identified Alien Crafts), it is difficult to verify some of this information, much of which is anecdotal.

This information is culled from a variety of published and unpublished sources. The following is a brief sketch of presidential involvement in and knowledge of the UFO cover-up.

Truman, Eisenhower, and Roswell

The documents which, if genuine, prove that President Truman was aware of the recovery of crashed alien spacecraft are at the center of a controversy. The Truman-Forrestal memorandum of September 24, 1947, if legitimate, would establish conclusively that Truman established Operation Majestic-12 to analyze bodies and wreckage recovered from the Roswell UFO crash. Truman had been quoted as expressing the view that UFOs were real and otherworldly in origin.

The alleged Eisenhower MJ-12 Briefing Document of November 18, 1952 would indicate that then President-elect Eisenhower was made aware of the Roswell crash and possibly other crashes.

Of particular interest are allegations that Eisenhower encountered aliens at Muroc Airfield (Edwards AFB) on Feb The Truman-Forrestal memorandum of September 24,1947, if legitimate, would establish conclusively that Truman established Operation Majestic-12 to analyze bodies and wreckage recovered from the Roswell UFO crash. Truman had been quoted as expressing the view that UFOs were real and other-worldly in origin.

A former steward on Air Force One during the Kennedy years has claimed that he discussed UFOs with Kennedy during a flight in December 1962, and that Kennedy told him