The January, 1989 issue of The MUFON Journal
featured an article which I wrote. It was called,
"Deliberate Deception: The Big Sur UFO Filming." In
that article I detailed having taken part in an
official U.S. Air Force cover-up of a UFO filming
which I supervised in 1964. I told about my part in
the incident, revealed what I had seen on the film- a
strange object which I called "a UFO" that day in the
office of Major Florenz J. Mansmann in the
Headquarters, 1st Strategic Aerospace Building at
Vandenberg Air Force Base. I also revealed that I was
summarily ordered to keep quiet about the incident. I
was told, "Lieutenant Jacobs, this never happened. You
are to say nothing about it." And, that is the very
definition of the word "cover-up."
I wrote my article at the urging of my friend John
Andrews and at the invitation of Walt Andrus at MUFON,
Inc. I did so because I thought the information I had
to share was important to serious students and
investigators of the UFO phenomenon, because I thought
it was important to verify that the government of the
United States had, indeed, covered up information
about the subject, at least in this one case to which
I was a party, and because I found the whole thing
interesting from a number of intellectual and
philosophical viewpoints. I spoke to some of these
issues in the article. Certainly, I saw no harm in it.
The story was the truth so far as I knew it.
I got a number of letters and inquiries in response
to the article. Most were productive, even from those
who did not accept everything I said and who wished to
debate points with me. I respect informed and
congenial debate. As a professional academician I find
such activity to be very healthy, in fact.
What I do not find healthy or productive is the
malicious carping and adolescent ill-temper of one
Phillip J. Klass. I first heard from this overbearing
boor in a letter dated January 25, 1989 in which he
practically ordered me to turn over to him a paper
which I had referenced properly in my article, to wit:
"Preliminary Report on Image Orthicon Photography from
Big Sur", written by Kingston A. George; an operations
analyst on the experiments with the B.U. Telescope
which we used at the Big Sur site. Klass offered to
pay me $25 dollars for my trouble and inferred that I
should hop to it and get this document sent to him so
it would be at his home when he got back from a ski
trip with his wife.
I don't like being ordered around, especially by
people I don't know. I didn't know Phillip J. Klass
from Adam's Ass at that time. I've come to wish that
it had been the fabled donkey which entered my life
that January day in Maine instead of him. Since that
time I have tried mightily to avoid this gadfly and
his self-righteous pronouncements. I have refused to
respond to his barbed correspondence. I have left him
free to believe what he wants to believe, expecting to
be left alone myself. I have not wanted to play his
idiot's game. But, now he has provoked a response.
Klass says that I lied about the incident; made it up
out of whole cloth. And he says I did it all for five
hundred lousy bucks from a tabloid newspaper.
Klass has become nearly hysterical in his need to
repudiate my story. I can only guess that the reason
for his bizarre antics is that my story is even bigger
than I thought it was. There must be some hidden
agenda from which he is playing. The purpose of the
article you're reading now is to refute the
allegations made about me by Mr. Klass, to illustrate
the depth of the well of ignorance from which he draws
his screwy conclusions about me and my story and,
hopefully, to put him and his crude slanders out of my
life for good. I really think the poor man needs to
find something better to do with his retirement years
than to persecute people who don't accept his
viewpoint about the nature of the universe and one of
its myriad mysteries.
In his self-published "Skeptics UFO Newsletter"
dated Jan. 1993, Klass writes nearly two full, single
spaced pages about me and my story. His headline
reads:
"JOURNALISM PROFESSOR (AND FORMER USAF OFFICER)
'MANUFACTURES' A TALL UFO TALE, THEN ACCUSES THE
GOVERNMENT OF COVERING IT UP:"
The "journalism professor (and former USAF
officer)" is me.
Now, I have no quarrel with anyone who wishes to
propose an alternate version of what happened that day
in 1964, nor could I object to anyone presenting real
evidence which proved, if possible, that I was wrong
in what I saw and what we photographed. Phillip J.
Klass does not present facts, however, but insists on
libeling me personally while attempting to assassinate
my character to discredit my story. This is a tactic
which Klass seems to enjoy using, not only with me,
but with anyone with whom he disagrees. Because he
can't prove witnesses wrong, he impugns their
character. He uses this nasty technique throughout his
so-called "newsletter." It's an old, vicious trick.
Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin used it over and
over until he was finally exposed as a fraud and
charlatan by Edward R. Murrow and others. Mr. Klass
really needs to go back to school to learn about
journalistic ethics, as well as the definition of the
word "news" if he intends to continue his publishing
pretense, in my view. If he learned anything there
from, it might save a lot of us from the venom of his
Poison-Pen.
For the record, once more, I did not "manufacture"
anything. The story I told was true. I stand by it as
it was accounted in The MUFON Journal. My story has
been verified by the only witness to it willing to
come forward. And that was Florenz J. Mansmann
himself, the Air Force Major who issued the cover-up
order to me in the first place. He is one of the few
people who got to analyze the film in depth at the
time we took it. Klass, I must point out, has never
even seen the film, much less had the chance to
analyze it for content.
I have.
There are several forms of proof which count in
scientific enquiry. One of them is to have
verification from a credible source other than the
observer. If I had "manufactured" a "cock and bull
story", as Klass asserts, then no one would
corroborate it. As the observer and reporter of my
true story, I hereby present verification-
corroboration- from a very credible source. I quote
from letters written by Florenz J. Mansmann:
From a letter to Lee Graham dated 1-30-1983:
The Enquirer story is true except the year was 1964
not 1965. The camera system we used was capable of
'nuts and bolts' focus from a point seventy miles from
any object being tracked so the photos were readable."
..."Consider if this secret scientific community did
not believe in all the data you have so expertly put
together, why would they send up so many packages from
Vandenberg and the Cape to try to establish
communication. Your research shows only too well we
have received communication, but as yet have not
enjoyed the two way communication we are attempting.
It will come soon."
From a letter to Peter Bons dated March 8, 1983:
"Dr. Bob opened a Pandora's box and in the last few
months I have been bombarded with phone calls and
letters. I try to answer the sincere ones. First, the
Enquirer story was true except the date was 1964. I
was in Vietnam in '65. Telescopic photography of that
magnitude makes sizes undeterminable. We knew the
missile size but could not compare since we did not
know how far from the missile the 'object' was at time
of beam release. Maneuverability was also at question
for the same reason. Propulsion was plasma like but
not probable. In such gravity, plasma induced speed
and maneuverability would not seem possible. From
clarity, action and situation in the film, the
assumption was, at that time, extraterrestrial.
Details would be sketchy and from memory, the shape
was classic disc, the center seemed to be a raised
bubble, not sure any ports or slits could be seen but
was stationary, or moving slightly- floating over the
entire lower saucer shape, which was glowing and
'seemed' to be rotating slowly. At the point of beam
release- if it was a beam, it, the object, turned like
an object required to be in a position to fire from a
platform--- but again, this could be my own assumption
from being in aerial combat... There is one thing
going on which may bring more to light soon. Howard
University is into computer scanning for
extraterrestrial signals from worldwide information
gathered from amounts of data, good scientific data."
From a letter to Mr. Robert Brown dated 11-28-91:
"This letter will verify that the entire UFO story
as printed on the front page of the Oct. 12, 1982
National Enquirer is true and factual as was the UFO
cover-up story on page 87 of the Jan 1985 issue of
Omni Magazine."
In reference to discussions between the civilian
agents who took the film and the 1st Stratad Chief
Scientist, Mansmann also comments in this letter to
Brown:
"There was mention of not including this incident
on 'blue paper' which I did not understand at the
time, but which I now feel he [one of the civilian
secret agents] meant 'the Blue Book' of UFO incidents.
Discussion of other incidents and projects were
discussed between the other four in the room, but I
was busy filling out their papers for release and
security of the film. The reasons for and
classification of the film I remember was left blank
for them to fill in. I only signed for the film when I
first received it. 'They' did not sign out for all the
footage but took out that part that showed the
encounter and returned the rest of the film to me as a
'complete' package. The one agent stated as he handed
me back the film---'that leaves you off the hook but
not off any disclosure--- understood'? Naturally my
answer was 'Yes sir.'
Lieutenant Jacobs went through the same routine
when he arrived, when he reviewed the film and when he
departed.
There has been so much developing in the realm of
life, time and space since that time. And I have been
fortunate enough to have been a part of so many
unbelievable projects that to this day I believe we
are getting help from someone or something 'out
there'."
And FINALLY, to me on 1-30-85:
"So verification is not a question. Your story as I
told everyone is true."
Now-- Klass says I "manufactured a tall UFO tale."
Obviously Klass doesn't know a damn thing about it,
nor about scientific enquiry nor about the rules of
evidence, as it seems from his strident ranting in
this pathetic "newsletter." When he impugns me, this
snide putz also impugns the word and reputation of an
honorable and truly heroic figure, Dr. Florenz J.
Mansmann, who as an Air Force officer made real
sacrifices of his personal safety and health for the
love of his country while people like Phil Klass sat
on their smug pseudo-skepticism with their smart
mouths, becoming self-proclaimed "debunkers." And that
is something which I won't tolerate from this ninny or
anyone else. Phil had better look up the word "libel"
before he prints any other lies about me or my former
comrade in arms, Florenz J. Mansmann. We were both
officers. As such we took an oath, "not to lie, cheat,
steal nor to tolerate such behavior in those around
us." Evidently Klass took no such oath, by the
evidence of this wretched attack on me and my
verifying sources.
Klass concludes his garbage barrage at me by
saying:
"After publication of Bob Jacobs' wild Big Sur UFO
tale in the National Enquirer, he wrote to his former
boss, Florenz Mansmann, on January 14, 1985 to explain
what had prompted him to write the article. Jacobs
said he first tried, unsuccessfully, to sell the
article to Omni magazine. 'As a poor teacher in an
impoverished state [Wisconsin], I then sold it to The
Enquirer to pay a few bills.' Jacobs reportedly
received $500 for his article."
I have no idea how Phil Klass got his paws on a
personal letter from me to my friend, Florenz
Mansmann. Nor do I know why he tries to distort the
truth further by quoting it out of context. There are
several errors here of omission and commission by the
"ethical" Mr. Klass. First, Mansmann was never my
"boss". He was a senior officer working in a related
duty to mine in another Command. Second, I was not
implying, as Klass' bracketed insert indicates, that
Wisconsin was impoverished. I was the one in an
impoverished state, a word meaning "condition" or
"circumstance," not my geopolitical residence.
Schoolteachers are always poor. At least the ones I
know. I am a freelance writer, too, and I usually get
paid for articles I write, as I did with that one. So
what? Klass has been paid as a writer, also. What does
that have to do with the veracity or lack thereof of
the issue at hand? And finally, if Klass is going to
pry into people's personal correspondence, and publish
it, why not reveal what I REALLY discussed in that
same letter? Here's what Klass did NOT see fit to
print.
I wrote the letter to share some thoughts about the
topic of the UFO incident with an old comrade. I was
extremely concerned because Lee Graham had told me
that Mansmann was afraid of "reprisal", if he got
involved in attempts to locate the missing Big Sur
film. I wrote in that letter from which Klass quoted:
"Lee Graham tells me that the Air Force now denies
that there even existed a 'telescope site' from which
to shoot such film. You and I know it was there. I
have a photo of us at the site smiling at the radio
device I designed to send timing signals up there from
Vandenberg. I got the Missile Insignia for that one.
You and I also know that the same site exists today on
Anderson Peak. From it we see the shuttle enter
California airspace! The Air Force can ONLY deny
things, it seems. And, like the Russians and the
Nazis, when they deny the truth and then the truth
comes out in public, how can they expect our citizens
to have trust and confidence in the institutions we
have erected to serve us?"
"Given that, as you put it to me at the time, 'this
never happened' [referring to the record of the UFO on
film], it's not surprising that Lee Graham can't get
verification of it from the Air Force or the Freedom
of Information Office. When Lee Graham tells me in a
letter that you confirm the story but are 'reluctant
to make any inquiry... for fear of reprisal from the
agency that appropriated the film', I shudder in my
boots. I have an old, rusted, bent key. I picked it
out of the dirt at Dachau. An historian friend of mine
affirms that it was used to, most likely, to open the
hot oven doors at that awful place which consumed so
many of my people who were afraid of 'reprisal' from
their government. Over two decades after the filming
of a 'warning shot', must we still fear 'reprisal' for
seeking answers to what may be the innermost secrets
of the cosmos itself?"
"I'm only a humble school teacher and alfalfa
farmer in Wisconsin. I could disappear tonight. Only
my fiancé, my dog and a few close friends would
notice. Because I am an American, I don't fear such
'reprisal', however. Perhaps it is because I am a very
naive American? Perhaps it's because our government
has done such a very good job of making 'nut-cases'
out of anyone who reports a UFO that my credibility is
shot and nobody cares what I say anymore."
"Certainly there are a large number of 'fringies';
true deluded or psychotic people who have climbed
aboard the UFO bandwagon, claiming daily free rides to
Venus and elsewhere to give their impotent lives some
notoriety and meaning. The media have had a lot of fun
propagating their stories at the expense of those of
us who investigate in good faith and natural curiosity
at a most peculiar and potentially exhilarating
phenomenon or set of phenomena."
"And all this leads me to question; why all of this
idiotic cover-up? They are here, aren't they? We know
it. The Russians know it. The South Africans and
Pakistanis know it. Every kid in the third grade knows
it. Reagan with his 'Star Wars' nonsense knows it. So
what's all the 'fear of reprisal' business. Steven
Spielberg told us all about it, for God's sake. Do we
have to hear it at Disneyland?! Do guys like Lee
Graham have to ferret out the truth to convince their
buddies that they aren't nuts?"
I also made the following comment in that letter,
and wonder why Klass made no reference to this:
"Philosophically, however, I have to wonder at our
arrogance in assuming that if contact from
interstellar intelligence HAS taken place, that it has
only taken place with us. The technology to which you
and I were witness, the technology recorded on that
few feet of film, indicates orders of magnitude from
our relatively primitive efforts in mechanics,
propulsion and possibly quantum physics as well. Such
intelligence might be suspected to regard us as little
more than savages: ALL of us on this planet. I might
even in my more retrospective moments, regard that
beam of light. no, THOSE BEAMS of light on our film as
a WARNING. A shot fired across the bow, so to speak,
of our nuclear silliness ship. I have a true account,
told me by another former Air Force guy of a VERY
close encounter in 1957 at one of our SAC bases in the
Atlantic. I'll relate it to you in person one day, I
hope."
Now, THAT is what my letter to Mansmann was about.
It was about truth and care and concern and
compassion; qualities which Klass ignores in his
attack on my character. Perhaps the issue of
"character" will become clearer as I respond to other
specific "charges" raised by Klass in his "newsletter"
item.
First, he quotes only from the first report of my
incident which was published in The National Enquirer
in 1982. While the essential facts of the story are
accurate in that report, it does a disservice to keep
using this piece to characterize both me and the
incident. In the MUFON Journal article, I spent a lot
of time decrying the tabloid factor in ufology. The
Enquirer, as Klass observes, was the only publication
which would take my piece in 1982. I tried having it
published in a number of more respectable periodicals,
with no success. And while the writing style was
changed by The Enquirer' rewrite staff so dramatically
that I can recognize very little of it as my own (eg:
I would NEVER say phrases like, "At the time of the
mind-boggling encounter...") the facts I reported are
the facts of the case, all except for the date which I
clarify in my MUFON Journal report; a report written
entirely by me and me alone, in my own words and my
own style.
I make a point in this second article, in fact, of
saying that those who wish to debunk, defame, ridicule
and defuse actual, unexplained UFO encounters, could
rely on the tabloid factor as part of their tactic of
defamation; a tactic which Klass is obviously using
now. Why, I must ask, does he not use the MUFON
Journal piece as the basis for his critique?
Klass reports, correctly, that on January 25, 1989
he wrote to me for the Kingston George report which I
had referenced in my MUFON article, and that I refused
to give it to him. There's a reason why I referenced
it and a reason why I refused to turn over it, or
anything else I might have had, to Phillip J. Klass.
First, the original point of the reference:
When my article appeared in The Enquirer, several
researchers began to seek verification. These included
a staff member from The National Enquirer, T. Scott
Crain, Lee Graham, John Andrews and others. Lee Graham
was the most persistent. As these researchers went to
work, in sequence the Air Force did the following:
[a] Denied that I ever had been in the Air Force.
(Then were forced to admit their error)
[b] Denied that I had been in the 1369th
Photographic Squadron
at Vandenberg Air Force Base.
(Then were forced to admit their error)
[c] Denied that I had anything to do with the
Image Orthicon
telescope.
(Then were forced to admit their error)
[d] Denied that I had anything to do with
establishing a tracking
site at Big Sur, California.
(Then were forced to admit their error)
[e] Denied the existence of a tracking site at Big
Sur, California.
(Then were forced to admit their error)
[f] Denied that there were any Atlas F or Atlas D
launches from
Vandenberg during any of the times I said that the
incident may have occurred.
(Then were forced to admit their error)
[g] Denied that there were any malfunctions of any
missiles launched
during the period of the Image Orthicon/B.U.
Telescope operation.
AND- were forced to admit their error when I
referenced the official, Air Force preliminary report
by Kingston A. George which said, "...One
powered-flight anomaly was observed, and the coverage
of the flights has produced enough data to show that
Big Sur photography could be an important adjunct to
other instrumentation."
That, and that alone was the reason for my
reference. The Air Force had said that were no
anomalies. George's report refuted that by saying that
there had been at least one. I never said nor implied
that the Kingston George report affirmed that we had
photographed a UFO. Klass implies that's exactly what
I did, and once again, Klass is wrong.
As for character: Consider why I refused to give
Klass my copy of the report. When he wrote in January
of 1989 demanding that I hand over to him my private
papers, I wasn't sure who he was. When I asked him for
references, he gave me the names of two people as
follows:
"However, 'to put [your] mind at rest' as to my
bonafides as
a loyal American citizen, you have my permission
to make inquiry to the following:
(1) Adm. B. R. Inman (USN, Ret.)
3509 Needles Drive
Austin, Tex. 78746
Adm. Inman was deputy director of the CIA during
the early years
of the Reagan Administration. Prior to that he was
director of the National
Security Agency, and before that he was Deputy
Director of the Defense Intelligence
Agency.
(2) Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham, Director
High Frontier
2800 Shirlington Road (#405)
Arlington, Va. 22206
Gen. Graham was director of the Defense
Intelligence Agency,
and before that was deputy director of the CIA.
Both men have worked with me and gotten to know me
in my efforts
for Aviation Week."
Put yourself in my position now. I had published an
article charging that the CIA, or some other secret
agency of the government, had been instrumental in
covering up the documenting of a UFO, that I had been
ordered to be part of a cover-up in connection with
that incident, and had now written about it. Then-
along comes some chipmunk demanding that I turn over
material to him and referring me to Bobby Inman and
Daniel Graham to soothe my anxiety! The last outfit in
the world to which I would turn for verification of a
source or the legitimacy of a UFO "researcher" would
be the CIA!
Then, in a little research of my own, I discovered
in a newsletter, entitled, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, VOl. 1-
Nr. 1, the premiere issue, an article titled KLASS
DISMISSED, Part 1 of 3, which characterized Phillip
Julian Klass as a CIA "asset"; one who deliberately
spreads disinformation, specifically about UFOs. This
interesting newsletter was published by W. Todd
Zechel, Paragon Productions, P. O. Box 632, Sauk City,
Wisconsin 53583. Zechel was the founder of Citizens
Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS) and a former field agent
for the National Security Agency (NSA). Articles about
him have appeared in OMNI, TV GUIDE and PARADE
magazines..
I contacted my attorney immediately, and he advised
me to have nothing to do with Klass or any of his
people, since they might be trying to set me up for
some sort of violation. In a letter dated April 3,
1989 I told Mr. Klass politely to go away and leave me
alone, as follows:
"On advice of counsel and with all due respect, I
am declining your offer. I have nothing which belongs
to you, I have nothing to which you are entitled by
rights and I don't like feeling pressured.
My article in the MUFON JOURNAL says all that I
have to say about the incident at Big Sur. The
pertinent part of the Kingston George report was
quoted only to prove that there was a malfunction
during the period of time during which the B.U.
telescope was at Big Sur and that the B.U. telescope
was certified to have recorded it. This proof was
necessary to refute the earlier assertion by the Air
Force that there was not even a launch, much less a
malfunction recorded by the B.U. telescope. I suppose
I shouldn't have been surprised by this denial since
the Air Force also denied earlier that there had ever
been a Lieutenant Robert Jacobs!
If you want a copy of the Kingston George report, I
suggest that you request it from the Air Force. It is
appropriately and accurately labeled in my article and
was in wide circulation around Vandenberg Air Force
Base at the time of its publication.
Your barbed comments are self-defeating. What I do
for a living has nothing whatever to do with you or my
freelance writing. I don't need lectures, especially
from you, on journalistic ethics. You need to learn
some tact if you expect people of good will to
cooperate with your research activities."
I had cited my source properly, given him the name
of it and its author and its date. That's all that ANY
scholar needs to do. Klass wanted me to do his
research for him, and I chose not to play his game.
And that should have ended it. Unfortunately, it did
not.
Mr. Klass went after my job at the University of
Maine, trying to discredit me in an attack which might
well have had me disciplined academically, if not
fired! This fit of pique was prompted directly by my
refusal to turn over the Kingston George document.
Writing to my chairman, Professor R. Steven Craig in
the Department of Journalism and Broadcasting, Klass
began his tirade with:
"Dear Prof. Craig:
I am writing to bring to your attention what seems
to me to be unbecoming conduct on the part of a
journalist and member of your faculty. One should
expect a faculty member to serve as a role model for
students in demonstrating the ethics and
responsibilities of their profession. I refer to Dr.
Bob Jacobs."
Klass then "introduced" himself as a "graduate
electrical engineer turned technical journalist" and
explained that his "hobby for more than 22 years has
been investigating seemingly mysterious, inexplicable
UFO incidents and applying my technical training and
journalistic skills to find prosaic/earthly
explanations."
He says that he became interested in my "claim" of
having photographed a UFO, referencing both of my
articles on the subject, including the piece about the
Kingston George report. He tells Craig about offering
to pay me for a copy of that report, comments on some
of my response to his request, concluding with my
refusal to send him the document. Then he goes for my
throat:
"I understand why Jacobs is reluctant to release
this report.
Based on my research, I'm confident the report
would reveal that his "UFO
tale" is a cock-and-bull story.
If Jacobs were a young journalist working for the
National Enquirer,
or one of its even less scrupulous clones, I might
be more tolerant of his
behavior. But when a professor of journalism, who
publicly accuses the USAF
and U.S. Government of 'cover-up,' resorts to
intentional distortion of the
facts to mislead his readers and then to cover-up,
I am deeply distressed.
I hope that you share my feelings.
Sincerely
(original signed by)
Phillip J. Klass"
I find it nothing short of astonishing and morally
reprehensible for a man's "hobby" (Klass' OWN
description of his interest in ufology) to result in
an attempt to have another man, in this case me,
discredited and fired from his profession and his
livelihood! What kind of a perverted mind would try to
destroy a man's career simply because that man would
not jump when it said boo?? I find it so astonishing
that I cannot believe that Klass is in this thing as a
"hobby." This letter of his about me is clearly and
patently slanderous. Nowhere in my article do I
"distort the facts" or "mislead [my] readers and then
to cover-up" as this venomous, misleading and
distorted epistle of his asserts. This is either a
shameless lie and a desperate, deliberate ploy to
discredit me, or the ravings of a man with a severe
problem in perceiving and dealing with reality. No one
should have to endure this sort of blatant abuse.
My freelance writing and publishing activities,
just like my career in the Air Force and the events of
that day in 1964, have absolutely nothing to do with
my present career as a dedicated, well-respected, and
legitimate university professor. What right has
Phillip Julian Klass to contact my boss over a matter
like this? This bizarre behavior lends credence in my
mind to Zechel's report about Klass, justifying fully
my reticence to have anything to do with him. If it
weren't so serious in its potential consequences, this
episode might have been funny. It was not. It is not.
Such behavior is dangerous and despicable.
Universities are highly vulnerable institutions where
any report or insinuation of misconduct on the part of
a faculty member must result in the institution taking
that report seriously and undertaking an investigation
of the accused. Unlike in the world at large in this
country, in Universities we are presumed guilty until
proven innocent in these Politically Correct times.
Klass caused me considerable embarrassment and grief
before I cleared my record of these charges, as I'm
confident he intended. I ignored him then, feeling it
best to let sleeping dogs lie. I cannot do so now.
In the final blow, in his "Skeptics.." report,
Klass comes to his intended coup de grace. It turns
out, Klass reveals, that Kingston A. George himself
has written an article in the Winter, 1993 issue of
Skeptical Enquirer, published by CSICOP (Committee for
the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the
Paranormal). Klass is, of course, a member of this
organization. So are James Oberg and The Amazing Randi
(professional magician and debunker, James Randi). It
is reasonable to conclude that Klass played some
considerable part in getting Kingston George to write
his article. Klass reports as follows about the George
article:
"On Sept. 22, 1964,* an Atlas ICBM was launched
shortly before
dawn and the small rockets intended to release its
"warhead" and two decoys
seemed to function properly. (Contrary to Jacobs
"claims, the warhead did
not tumble into the Pacific Ocean hundreds of
miles short of its target.')
But the motion pictures obtained with the new
image orthicon were analyzed
and they revealed that when the decoys were
released they were accompanied
by a small cloud of debris. Unless this was
corrected, George wrote,
'the soviets could defeat our ICBM decoys by using
a few telescopes
on mountain peaks in the USSR'. ...
As a result of this important discovery, George
reports in
his article, "Everyone who was at the telescope
site or had seen the film
had to be identified. All, including Jacobs and
myself, had to be questioned
on what they had seen and what they thought it
meant. Each was cautioned not
to mention what was on the film to anyone and not
to discuss it with others--
even fellow workers who had originally seen it at
the same time! None of us
had more than a guess at the meaning, and the
civilian intelligence experts
who did the "debriefing" gave no hints. Weeks
later, my clearance level was
increased to allow me to see the films again and
analyze them. I don't think
Bob Jacobs ever gained the required clearance."
* emphasis on date added by Jacobs
I have every reason to believe that Kingston George
is an honorable and honest man. Therefore, I believe
him when he reports seeing the film taken from a
flight on September 22, 1964 and that he later
analyzed that film with the results he feels free to
discuss here. Whether or not there is much credence to
a concern that the soviets might have been able to
defeat "our ICBM decoys by using a few telescopes on
mountain peaks in the USSR", I leave up to the reader
to decide. For my part, the vision of a forest of
telescopes trained on the skies 24 hours a day looking
for a "small cloud of debris" is "mind-boggling",
indeed.
As anyone who has followed this incident knows, I
have had trouble fixing the exact date of the launch.
This is not deliberate on my part, but simply a matter
of inexact records. The launch in question may have
happened on September 22nd. It may be the same one
Kingston George describes. But there are discrepancies
in his memory and mine. First, the launch we
photographed was NOT predawn. It was broad daylight.
The radar chaff, a “cloud of debris”, was part of the
package. The object which flew into the frame was a
solid craft, saucer shaped, and not a “cloud of
debris.” George may be talking about another incident
entirely since, according to my records, the most
probable dates were either September 2, 3 or 15, 1964.
If the date was September 22nd, then he is not
discussing the same portion of the flight which I am.
In a letter to T. Scott Crain, Jr. dated May 6,
1987, as reported in Crain's MUFON Journal article
referenced above, Mansmann comments on statements by
an Air Force spokesman to OMNI Magazine writer, Eric
Mishara. The spokesman is quoted as saying, "We have
no documentation of a UFO incident...The dummy warhead
hit the target." Mansmann responded:
"If the Air Force spokesman did review a
close-dated launch and saw nothing, it could not have
been the launch that perpetrated such quick security
action."
Klass claims that "the security classification of
the movies taken by Jacobs was quickly upgraded from
'Secret' to 'Top Secret' " and so, as George puts it,
"I don't think Bob Jacobs ever gained the required
clearance." Security clearances in the military are
granted on a per project and a "need-to-know" basis. I
had a "Top Secret" clearance a number of times. The
fact is that I DID see the film I discussed, so I must
have been cleared for it. Mansmann says I saw it! But,
this is not the real issue. The film which I'm
discussing had NO SECURITY CLEARANCE. You may recall
that we were told, "It never happened." If it never
happened in fact, then it cannot have been classified.
In an article called UFO FILMED CIRCLING ATLAS
ROCKET by T. Scott Crain, Jr. in the September 1988
issue of The MUFON Journal, pg. 10, Mansmann confirmed
the number of times he viewed the film, and with whom
else he did so, to wit:
"...once in my quality control review and editing
for the General with only one of his staff; once in
review with the Chief Scientist and his assistant;
once for the Commanding General with only one of his
staff; and a fourth time with the Chief Scientist, his
assistant, the three government men and Bob Jacobs."
I must point out that NOT ONE of these people was
Kingston A. George. I think it highly possible that
Kingston George never viewed this film since he was
not on site the day it was photographed. If he did
"analyze" this film, it was not with the limited group
which Mansmann references and George is still not
talking about the UFO footage which I saw, but
obfuscating the issue with this story of another,
relatively mundane incident. The film images which I
saw and those reported by Kingston George via Phil
Klass, are NOT the same things! Speaking about his
final turnover of the film in question to the agents
that day, Dr. Mansmann told T. Scott Crain, Jr., "They
did not sign out for all the footage but took out that
part that showed the encounter * and returned the rest
of the film to me as a 'complete' package."
* emphasis added by Jacobs
It was no "small cloud of debris" which performed
so amazingly on the film which I viewed. It is not a
secret that the package deployed from the nosecone, by
the way, contained aluminum "chaff" which formed a
"small cloud of debris" in-tended to fool the enemy
radar. This "cloud" was part of the decoy system. It
was plainly visible on the screen, as was the UFO
which flew into the frame and fired beams of light at
the warhead. This "cloud" of chaff, needless to say,
also would have been visible plainly to 'a few
telescopes on mountain peaks in the USSR.' .
I wrote once that I had nothing more to say about
this curious incident at Big Sur. Had Phillip Julian
Klass let the matter lay, I would have been true to my
word. But I concur firmly with the old saw that says,
"Evil flourishes when good men do nothing." The
infuriating arrogance of Klass in his vitriolic
attacks on the character of good men must not be
tolerated. It is the epitome of evil in a free society
where the open exchange of ideas and information is
paramount to the survival of that freedom. Klass is
certainly within his rights to investigate, to do his
own "research," and to publish his own views on any
topic of his choice. Florenz Mansmann and I were in
the Air Force, along with millions of other veterans
over the decades, to defend those rights of his. I
expect him to observe the same rights in others,
however, and not to resort to slander and libel and
the manu-facture of "tall tales" of his own to
assassinate the character of those with whom he
disagrees. We have clear laws against such conduct,
and I shall be only too happy to invoke them if Mr.
Klass persists in defaming me personally.
This concludes what I have to say about the
incident at Big Sur. I have told my story and given
the documentation for it. Mr. Klass and Mr. George
believe that there is another explanation for what I
saw than that which I report. Others have offered
their opinions, too over the years since I came forth
from the the dark of covering it up. Someone I believe
to be James Oberg, another professional "debunker,"
sent me a copy of an article "proving" to his
satisfaction that the UFO was the planet Venus. Before
that he sent me a copy of another document which he
had found, contending that it was the moon. While in
the Air Force I photographed both Venus and the moon
in missile shots a number of times. Both Florenz
Mansmann and I are extremely familiar with what those
pictures look like. The image on film about which I
report here was neither of these celestial bodies!
When I first submitted the article to OMNI magazine
back in 1982, the editor wrote back to inform me with
his rejection notice that they were not interested in
"points of light" and that the Air Force told them
that what I reported was actually "internal lens
reflections in the telescope". Where they got the
information for that one is beyond me! Maybe OMNI
reporter, Eric Mishara or Harry Lebelson, formerly of
OMNI; can speak to this anomaly. I can't.
And finally, if the film, as Kingston George
implies is now unclassified, then why in the world has
it not been released to the numbers of solid
researchers like Lee Graham, and T. Scott Crain, Jr.
and Eric Mishara and OMNI magazine and others who have
filed FOIA actions to see it? Every one of these
enquiries has been greeted with the same response by
the U.S. Air Force; the film does not exist. If it
does and if it is released, there are two people who
can verify whether or not it is the one which they saw
that September day in 1964 at Vandenberg Air Force
Base. Phil Klass and Jim Oberg are not included in
this exclusive list, I'm afraid. The witnesses are Dr.
Florenz J. Mansmann and Dr. Robert M. Jacobs. And I'm
certain that I speak for both of us when I say that we
would welcome that opportunity to put this thing to
rest once and for all. Until then the evidence rests.
Mr. Klass can believe whatever pleases him. What he
may not do is to accuse me of having "manufactured a
tall tale" or of "covering it up." Such charges are
utterly and absolutely false and the kind of conduct
that brought them forth is unacceptable both in
scholarly research and common, polite discourse. He
is, in short, a liar.
|