UFO and Nuclear Weapons

—– Original Message —–

From: <xxxx@verizon.net
To: <xxxxx@bibliotecapleyades.net
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 6:20 PM
Subject: Freedom and Free Will are excellent natural rights of mankind, and the awakening of Consciousness is a priority and essential to our Evolution in the Universe

This is at the heart of both our enjoyment and our repression, because there will always be a force that is determined that the masses don’t deserve it. What they don’t understand is that without these, we cannot survive as a race. And with these we will always struggle to achieve freedom and free will, because of the great responsibility that comes with both. It is hard work.

I have been struggling to understand what those who are here in our skies are really up to. They do not make it easy to understand. Add to that the denial humans pile on top both within the masses and the governments or power structures and you have a very difficult problem to understand. I know this much with certainty, they are intimately responding to our political/military strategy and implementation. Whether this is for our benefit, benign or their favor only is yet unclear.

The messengers that say they are in contact with them also say they are here for our benefit. I am not so sure that it is wise to take that at face value without confirmation. If we were going to another planet, is that the way we would allow ourselves to be known? Through coercive manipulation of the militaries, crop circles and projecting our intent through messengers? Wouldn’t it make more sense to work through the political and policy structure of that planet? Otherwise, how would it have any validity?

Don’t we have a validity problem with UFO?

Our global higher institutions do not recognize it as a valid issue. Global policy makers may have it on their agenda, but it will be related to global security or global sovereignty. The political structure is quiet on the real issues they are certainly aware of after 65 years of intense activity and study. Sure they release files from time to time in different countries, but it is like throwing scraps to the dogs.

They eat it up and are distracted and satiated. But the real disturbing and important findings are being held under strict classification. At the same time I am not convinced that the bright minds within these circles have it figured out – because they are being thrown scraps as well – by those who are here in our skies. It is a low level stand-off, a dilemma. But to everyone involved including the masses, it is not truly “official” and openly recognized or dealt with.

Do you think that someone who approaches us (our race) in this manor can truly be trusted?

Do you think this is a wise approach?

I am all for enlightenment. It is our gift that we can be enlightened, but it is also our responsibility as to how we achieve that individually and as a race. So far our record overall is not that good. But there are many pockets of hope, and this is what keeps up moving forward. I don’t think we were meant to have outside help on enlightenment other than that creator (whoever that is). It is our responsibility. It is our will. this is why we have free will – to achieve those things individually and together.

Another important issue is that our religious institutions do not officially recognize the visitors. Now that could be because of the structure, the dogma, the leadership will not allow it. And that could apply to our higher institutions and our governments. Is it bad to hesitate as they seem to be doing? Or is it wise to wait for the appropriate approach/contact and in the meantime, be extremely skeptical and cautious?

If you were in charge, would you throw open your arms to the visitors after hearing the messengers of the world?

I think there is plenty of evidence that indicates that we should be extremely cautious.

Our nuclear weapons infrastructure has been thoroughly surveyed and at certain specific times relating to policy, tampered with. Other aspects of our weapons infrastructure have been tampered with and we have been clearly shown the superiority involved.

Do we just ignore that and open our arms?

There is no clear answer here. Not yet. In the meantime, I don’t think we can look to our political leadership for answers, nor do I think they should be less than cautious.

Maybe the visitors are here for our benefit. Maybe their way of getting themselves known is one that has merit. I still think caution is warranted by our governments.

Until we know – you and I – we should be cautious too.

All the best,
Robert Duvall

Do UFO respond to our political will in the arena of nuclear weapons?

It is inevitable to compare the onset of prolific UFO activity of the last 60 or so years to our acquiring nuclear weapons capability. In making that comparison it is essential to realize the possibility that an historical relationship could exist, and to at least perform a study to make that determination. This paper’s primary goal is the introduction of the historical correlative concept and represents a small sample of such a study.

This paper also provides topic organizational structure allowing the data to be collected in a fashion that is easily applied to historical research. Although much progress has been made towards firming this approach, not all topics have received correlative attention as of this writing.

Why choose military sighting data?

The significance of military sightings is imbedded in the high quality of the observation and documentation, the consistency of the types of activity, and most important, the notice taken by the chain of command. Engaging the military of a state is the most direct way of getting attention – all the way to the top.

It is apparent that direct contact with leaders of states today is rare or probably nonexistent. Any sighting at or near to a state’s capital should therefore be treated as extremely significant. Most normal UFO activity occurs in fashions not meant to attract attention, such as in the guise of night or in remote areas, or so brief in length as to make it nearly impossible to ascertain anything from the sighting.

When discovered, UFO usually end any observation by leaving quickly. Yet military engagement is direct, specific in type and location, often having duration indicating the intent to acquire full attention.

Repetition of specific activities related to military could very well be attempts to relate or demonstrate clear superiority, concern over policy/decisions, and, with the more aggressive activity, a conveyance of warnings. That cannot be ignored as a distinct possibility. This is the case with UFO activity related directly to nuclear technology, weaponry and the associated political prowess.

What does this have to do with a possible historical relationship?

Evidence supports this relationship. The location and the timing of many of these sightings are coincident with historical events within the related realm, whether that is conventional conflict or specific aspects of nuclear policy and militarization. This does not apply just to the US. There is much to be learned by applying an orderly study of this relationship both in conventional military conflict and nuclear militarization globally.

Introducing this historical relational concept in a convincing manner to the general populace would require a fairly extensive set of consistent examples. When looking at the complex history of the last 60 years, the task becomes daunting.

However, setting specific categories and building examples for each with consideration of pertinent global military actions helps simplify this significantly. The separation between “conventional” and “nuclear” strategy/decisions during the various conflicts must be maintained at all times. The “conventional” military actions have related UFO activities which likely carry with them an agenda differing from that of “nuclear” related UFO activities.

While the results from each category may not stand firm statistically, applied together the composition with their patterns of behavior become more revealing. Over time a sense is acquired of the types of nuclear related policies/decisions/events and the kinds/timing of UFO activity these elicit.

Loren Gross has written about the Berlin crisis of 1948 in an historical relational manner (NCP-01: Some Early Patterns). There are many more nuclear historical manifestations to draw from. Although we lay claim to being the first to detonate atomic weapons, the events that we are studying here in the US are not peculiar to the US – Britain, France, the former Soviet Union (and now, Russia), China, Israel, Pakistan, India, and probably South Africa, all likely have had similar types of activity.

The focus of this study has only included the first five. Of those, China and France have yielded little information thus far. Actions of UFO related to nuclear technology and its utilization border on predictable.

The following list represents known categories for UFO event/nuclear historical correlative study:

  • Weapons Development and Manufacture– Atomic and thermonuclear – research facilities (Los Alamos, Sandia Labs, Lawrence Livermore) and other developmental locations.
    This category seems straight-forward in that sightings at these locations could be related to activity at these facilities at the time of the sighting. It could even be as simple as status checks or demonstrating concern through repeated presence at facilities.

More study is needed in this category to determine if any historical significance exists in these incursions.

  • Fuel Processing Facilities(initially Oak Ridge Tennessee then Hanford Washington -in my backyard).
    Hanford was the second facility built to support the Manhattan Project. The fuel for the weapons used in Japan came from this facility. It would be an obvious target for surveillance and demonstration.

An event occurred at this facility on or around the date of the Trinity Test.

  • Hanford, WA:

Radar picked up a fast moving oval object the size of three aircraft carriers side by side which then began to hover over N-Plant at 65,000 ft altitude. Six F6F’s were scrambled to the object but reached a maximum altitude of 42,000 ft, 5,000 ft above the rated ceiling of the F6F.

The pilots were forced to go back as their engines began to fail and fuel became dangerously low. The object then disappeared as quickly as it came. At least twenty minutes elapsed during the event. The object was described as “very streamlined like a stretched-out egg and pinkish in color” and emitting vapor from the outer edges.

The date of the occurrence was described by Rolan Powell, one of the pilots, as “six weeks before the Japanese surrendered aboard the Battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay on September 2, 1945.” This places the sighting in the middle of July.
Living On The Edge: An American war hero’s daring feats as a navy fighter pilot, civilian test pilot, and CIA mercenary by Byron D. Varner, privately published. Also interviews with the author and principal, Rolan D. Powell by Walt Andrus.
Thanks to Francis Ridge

NICAP Web Site

Long duration sightings at or near these facilities close to such important dates can interpreted as demonstrations. The timing of these demonstrations often occur about significant atomic/nuclear related events. Do they want our leaders to be cognizant of these incursions and their importance? It is as if they are applying pressure.

The sighting over the Oak Ridge facility September 18 of 1944 occurred on the same day as the Hyde Park Accord, a secret accord between the US and Britain [F. D. Roosevelt and W. Churchill] deciding atomic bombing of Japan. There are many events that have occurred over the weapons material manufacturing facilities and much opportunity to learn the historical significance.

A side note:
In a search for information relating UFO to Hanford, documents relating to the cleanup efforts at Hanford turned up with information on a waste dump area officially titled “UFO Landing Area.” It is in one of the oldest dump areas of the reservation and adjacent to the main security facilities.

It appears, based on another person’s review of recent aerial photos, that the cleanup is complete at that location.

That was an interesting find. The titles of these various cleanup areas do not show a theme of humor or sarcasm. The underground plume of contaminants at the reservation is slowly working its way toward the Columbia River.

At this time, there is not much we can do to halt this progression.

  • Weapons Testing– have test dates and locations, Space Tests-EMP Moon N-test? (US, Britain, France and Russia)
    It is likely that appearances were made at a majority of the tests. There is film footage from the DoD that looks suspiciously like a UFO applying surveillance during a test. Many of these tests are available on video.

Some of these tests were demonstrations themselves for the sake of applying pressure to the former USSR. These would be likely candidates for demonstration activity from the UFO.

One test in particular that either was or wasn’t attempted, was a demonstration test that was slated to occur on the Moon. There are two accounts – one that says the Air Force shut the project down and another that says it was launched, intercepted and destroyed by UFO.
Tests did actually take place in space, however, in 1958 and again in 1962 after the test moratorium was over.

These were executed to realize the results of ionizing the Van Allen belt with radiation. As it turned out in a test from Johnston Island, radar, radio communications and power were all knocked out in a large area. This EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) affect is known to be a useful tool in knocking out the enemies’ ability to retaliate. The possibility of an enemy’s use of EMP has become an important driver in having missile defense capability.

Another attempted test on Johnston resulted in destruction of the rocket on the pad and resulting plutonium contamination of a large area around the launch facility. Deaths have been attributed to exposure following the accident.

Its unimaginable that we would have continued to get away with sending these weapons into space. Between the US and the USSR there were at least 20 tests. These were cut off due to the danger posed to space assets, astronauts and cosmonauts, and the population as a whole (not to mention UFO).

An Outer Space Treaty was drawn up in response to keep nuclear weapons out of space for detonation or targeting from space. There is a good video (below) called “Nukes in Space” (Peter Kuran) and more information on the space tests available on the Internet.


Nukes In Space


from BlipTV Website

Delivery of fissile materials via naval vessel for these tests had UFO fly-overs. It is also likely the USS Indianapolis and its ill-fated mission delivering the fissile material unescorted for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings had visits by UFO.

There are survivors from that sinking, but It seems unjustifiable interviewing them about possible sightings during their voyage after hearing their personal accounts of the hell they lived through.

  • Rocket/Missile Development(White Sands, Australia, Russia).
    It would be consistent for UFO to monitor rocket development both as future delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons and for our space purposes.

Accounts exist to support this observation. Further work is needed to provide examples.

  • Nuclear Threat or Standoff Conditions– dates of US decisions or military command recommendations to pursue the use of nuclear weapons during various conflicts and standoffs.

    It is this category that would include incursions over Washington D.C. and other capitals throughout the world. There are many examples to draw from. The demonstrations in these instances would be more bold, pointed at leadership and persistent in duration. The 1952 flap holds many secrets.

At that time we were in the midst of the Korean war, were on schedule with development of the hydrogen bomb, had many complex issues to consider regarding the Soviets with their nuclear weapons development and China. China’s involvement in the Korean War had pushed our military command towards recommending the use of atomic weapons at least once.

This instance had taken place in the first months of 1951. In 1952 we had new developments involving China over the situation in the Indo-China region. China was once again aiding in a growing conflict that would eventually oust the French colonial government and persist to become the Vietnam War.

An article researched and printed in a prominent Japanese newspaper Asahi on September 16, 1984, states that according to documents retrieved through the FOIA, on July 16, 1952, the joint chiefs made the recommendation to take on China utilizing atomic weapons.

Excerpts from the article as translated to English:

  • “The United States Department of State announced on the 14th [September, 1984] that in its diplomatic documents, the United States Armed Forces were concerned with the French gradually losing in its frontline battle in the Indo-China War. The United States was contemplating cutting resources to the League for Vietnamese independence(The Vietnamese army led by Ho Chi Minh), and to use nuclear weapons against China to prevent their descending south.

    It is known from the diplomatic documents released last year [1983], that nuclear weapons considered for use against China by the United States when entering the Korean War. But this is the first time that the consideration for the use of nuclear weapons in the first Indo-China war was made public.

    According to those documents, the first time that a nuclear strike against China was considered, was on January 11, 1952 at the conference held by military representatives from the United States, France, and England, Chairman Bradley of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs. He suggested that, in order to halt the southern advance of China in the Indo-China war, they warn China about the use of nuclear weapons as being one of their options. But, telling the method that they would use in a retaliatory attack was considered unwise, and the suggestion was dropped.

    In the same year, on July 16, at the strategic military conference held by the Department of State and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chairman Bradley stated that it would be difficult to halt the southern advance of China without paralyzing their transportation systems with nuclear weapons.

It is not known at this time what the view of President Truman was concerning this topic.”

There is evidence to support that strong connections exist between political/military considerations of the use of nuclear weapons and the appearance of UFO at the capitol or other important government facilities.

Of the conflicts since WWII, the Vietnam War has provided the largest number of nuclear scenarios beginning in 1949, when the Chinese began supplying arms to Ho Chi Minh.

Certainly all of the nuclear threats and standoffs have to be studied to look for consistent patterns before passing judgment on the 1952 D.C. correlation indicated above.

  • Deployment of Nuclear Bomber and Missile Wings– US and overseas, increased activity as a result of. (over bombers on alert status, weapons storage, harassing bombers on training missions, etc…) (most US locations were bases left over from WWII).

    Deployment historical documents for the US and overseas are being utilized. Although this category is not documented yet, many examples have been collected over the years to suggest that correlation of activity with deployment is a sure thing. This will be backed with data as this effort continues.

The primary purpose of covering this topic is to indicate a strong statistical relationship. If UFO are truly interested in and concerned over our nuclear components as the evidence supports, this would in itself be the motivation for the different incursions over these bases. Monitoring weapon types, movement and deployment would surely be the activities they would engaged in. Another aspect this topic uncovers is the treatment generally of our military planes.

UFO tend to engage our military aircraft directly and boldly.

  • Nuclear False Alerts– bomber fleet attacks or missile launches indicated by early warning radar installations or satellites-occurring in the US or USSR (with consideration of specific nuclear related action or deployment by a country, increasing political tensions).

    This is one hot topic. Of course there have been many false alerts that were of our own accord, whether equipment malfunction, inadequate equipment design, or technology infancy. Then there are some that probably fall completely out of our hands, and its interesting to note what was going on when these occurred. As an example, in the mid 1970’s, European NATO countries were reformulating defense policy.

It made little sense to have large numbers of ground troops in the face of a nuclear threat from the USSR. What really made sense both economically and strategically, was to have Eastern Europe defended by a theater of medium range nuclear tipped missiles. The only problem was that the location of the missiles only gave Moscow six minutes response time. Comparing that with what the US had left a clear imbalance.

Deployment of the Pershing II missiles began in the early eighties. Many articles about false alerts during this period indicate the number of false alerts through 1985 is surely in the thousands. This is difficult to verify. Equally difficult to verify is the source of these alerts. There are the same few explanations repeated over and over. While this accounts for a few, what of the rest?

The true depth of the issue of false nuclear alerts is not explored or exposed for reasons likely having to do with public confidence. If UFO have had a role in keeping our defense apparatus off balance with these staged scenarios, who in the defense department would ever admit this?

Going back to December of 1950, about a year after Russia had detonated its first atomic bomb, we had an alert that looked like Russian bombers headed towards our Northeastern coast. This was probably our first alert. The bombers faded out on the radar screens before any detrimental action was taken. Its interesting to note that a year after the first detonation would have provided the Russians enough time to assemble the weapons and to get the bombers ready for the task.

This is a difficult topic to get good data on. But it would be consistent that UFO would engage the US and the Soviets in such a fashion.

If anyone reading this is aware of examples, please pass them along.

  • Missile Wing Interference(nondestructive and limited scope demonstrations/warnings) – with missile launch readiness or missile trajectory change, or with test launches curtailing dummy warhead trajectory, all demonstrating highly advanced capability we are unable to anticipate and design to. (Both US and USSR. What else do they have up their sleeve?)

At some point we passed the line separating the possibility and the probability of utilizing ICBM weapons. This is a discussion worth engaging in because it will likely reveal that military and political will somehow changed in the early 1960’s to elicit the bold UFO activity experienced at the various missile bases.

It is no secret to most individuals who have read the various publications discussing military related UFO activity that launch capability of limited numbers of missiles were taken offline on a few occasions, and that launch coordinates were altered at least once.

There was also a test launch of an Atlas ICBM with a dummy warhead out over the Pacific in September of 1964 (Deliberate Deception: The Big Sur UFO Filming – Bob Jacobs). This test was filmed and, upon review of the film, officials in the airforce found a disk entering into the frames, circling the warhead, shooting a laser like beam at four separate locations on the warhead, and exiting the frames.

The dummy warhead then tumbled out of its trajectory. There are many other instances including an individual silo in Russia where the controls indicated to the operator for a harrowing 15 seconds that the launch sequence was initiated and the missile was about to launch. A massive UFO hovered outside of the silo control facility.

The top officials were aware of this event. Why did these kinds of activity occur? One assessment is that we were being shown a superior capability. For what purpose?

Here are some possible reasons:

  • Indicating to our military command that we do not have the control over these assets that would have to be in place in order to utilize them.
  • Allowing that we may not know whether our equipment is malfunctioning or that the source is external.
  • Allowing that in a real scenario, we will not have certainty that interference wouldn’t occur again.

Uncertainty seems to play an important role. With thousands of nuclear weapons ready to go at any time and with the predictions of the outcome uncertainty has no place. No permanent damage was incurred by these activities and our national security was minimally compromised.

The people at the top were well aware of these events.

  • Nuclear Military Exercises(US and joint)
    This is another category that is worth filling in with some research. If pressure was being applied using these other areas for demonstration, likely nuclear exercises would have had them as well.
  • Nuclear Accidents(research, reactor, weapons test, weapons lost, vessels sunk).
    There was one purported incident in Canada where a small nuclear-tipped cruise missile was fired from a US military aircraft at a UFO, missing it, of course. Although that may not be considered an accident, it is not stated whether the missile was recovered after the incident.

    There were many occasions when bombs were lost, nuclear submarines loaded with missiles sank, and accidents occurred at nuclear fuel processing plants and nuclear power plants. A limited search for activity at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania turned up dry. There may have been some related activity after the event. It will take more work.

    Chernobyl was a different case. UFO Activity occurred prior to and after the accident there.

Readings before and after a sphere descended over the facility just after the accident indicated that the level in that area had been reduced by over 2/3, according to Paul Stonehill in “The Soviet UFO Files”.

  • Mining Raw Uranium– what better place to make a statement than the mines.
    There is documented activity over uranium mines in Africa. It is likely that data will support mine-related sightings in Wyoming.

And here’s a fascinating event that occurred in Texas:

  • The summer of 1971, I was working the night shift for Conoco Oil Co. at an open pit uranium mine west of Karnes City, Tx. I was one of 6 people operating Caterpillar 657B earth movers. We were down to about 210 feet deep when this incident happened. It was about 11:10 PM , just after shift change we were getting ready to crank our machines, when the 85 acre pit lit up as if it was daylight. The light was so bright that I had to squint because it hurt my eyes.

I remember hearing a high pitched hissing noise and the hair on my arms stood on end. I was so scared, I fell to the ground and started praying. I remember trying to look up, but the light was so bright I couldn’t. After about 2 minutes, the light started getting dimmer and I could finally look up at it. What I saw amazed me.

The object was round and the bright light was coming from the center of the bottom of the UFO. Around the perimeter of the craft was hundreds of penlight size light beams that alternated in all colors of the spectrum. Now I know they were laser beams. The UFO was rising up slowly at first and then went straight up out of sight in about 10 seconds.

I was crying and shaking and so was everyone else. The other shift workers thought we were crazy when we told them what had happened. But we got the last laugh. This is how we proved it actually happened. There is a vein of uranium ore that runs from George West Texas to almost Texarkana Texas.

When determining where to place a mine, the following steps are accomplished:

  1. A geologist with a geiger counter flies over the area and finds the highest radiation reading.
  2. Drilling trucks are sent out and core samples are drilled to determine the highest concentration of uranium ore. These core samples are drilled in a grid pattern and every core sample is given a tracking number and logged in showing the concentration and amount of uranium present.
  3. The open pit mine is then laid out according to these core samples. When this UFO incident happened, we were about 2 feet away from a layer of hard rock called the “tap rock” that laid directly on top of the uranium ore. The uranium ore varied in depth from 6 to 18 inches and had about the same brown color as low grade coal.

Two days after this incident, the tap rock was removed to expose the uranium ore. We were astounded to find that the uranium ore was now a chalky white substance that had NO radioactivity at all!

There was a 250 foot diameter circle of this chalky material in the center of the pit. Outside of the circle, the uranium ore was still as potent as before the incident. Core samples don’t lie. This chalky material was uranium before this incident. Many a night I have laid in my bed thinking about what happened.

I think the UFO needed the uranium for some reason.

    Occurred : 6/15/1971 23:10 (Entered as : 6/15/71 23:10)
    Reported : 5/27/1999 21:18
    Posted : 6/23/1999
    Location : Karnes County, TX
    Shape : Circle UFO sighting over open pit uranium mine.

Interpretation of this event is that a demonstration was made regarding the use of uranium. If UFO needed raw or processed uranium, certainly given the advanced capabilities displayed, they could have taken as much as they wanted from any source.

If that were the intent you would see much more of that kind of activity around these mines and likely we would be dealing with losses at facilities where processed material is stored, which is simply not supported by the sighting data available. In this case however what we have is a known quality and quantity of raw material that is days away from being extracted.

Right in front of the workers this UFO comes down and renders the uranium worthless in an area large enough to get attention. There are no other events on subsequent days. Just this one. This surely got the attention of any engineering personnel working on the project. It is likely that the information was forwarded to the AEC or another government agency.

Another event was probably noted by the government for its specificity in dealing with nuclear technology.

The pressure was maintained.

  • Weapons Component and Chemical Manufacturing Facilities
    There were likely events occurring over plants that may have been involved in materials used in processing weapons fuel. More work is needed for this category.
  • Weapons Dismantling Facility(Pantex, Texas)
    This should provide some recent activity if they are monitoring our progress.
  • Power Outage Events– conflict related? Nuclear related? (Vietnam – many events)
    Is it possible that the power outage events of the 1960’s and 1970’s were responses to political/military actions? The many articles and books indicate the immense depth of political turmoil brought on by the Vietnam War.

The controversy over the courses of action and the lack of a clear plan based on sound intelligence and analysis brought the public in on the political fray. These sentiments were shared by the public of allied countries as well. From the controversial Tonkin Gulf Resolution (possible UFO involvement in this incident) on we were in over our heads.

Documentation from several government sources reveal that discussions to utilize nuclear weapons came up on several occasions. Early in 1965, President Johnson had initiated a massive bombing campaign in Vietnam that continued throughout the year.

  • What happened towards November of that year?
  • If indeed the Northeastern US power outage of that year was initiated by UFO, what was the message?
  • What prompted that action?
  • Was Johnson initiating a nuclear option?

There were serious nuclear bomber training missions from an aircraft carrier in the Vietnam region the summer of that year. A clear picture has not yet emerged and further historical research is needed to look for the correlative relationship.

The other outage events have to be evaluated as well.

  • Hiroshima and Nagasaki
    Japanese friends and associates have shed much light on these events. It doesn’t take long for the importance and horrific nature to set in when you study them. While it is common knowledge among some of those who were there at the time of the bombing that UFO were present weeks and perhaps months before and after, there is little known evidence to support this.

After the bombing there were efforts to study the affects by Americans from many different disciplines. Film and camera crews accompanied them documenting every aspect of these affects. Included in the photographic records are probably hundreds of pictures and film footage of the UFO present on a daily basis.

While a few pictures are posted on the Internet that appear to include UFO, a more robust photographic record will be needed to set the record straight. Additionally, there are probably some written accounts of the UFO surveillance.

There can be no doubt that there was much outward interest and concern displayed during this unique and horrific time in human history.

  • Naval Nuclear Launch Submarines
    Deployment of submarines is unique due to the ability to close in to specific locations. Many of these sightings involve UFO submerging in and exiting the oceans.


  • Treaties and Their Role
    Is it possible that related UFO activity had a small influence on treaties? It is hard to ignore the distinct possibility that UFO have pressured our governments indirectly.

Today researchers are in a unique position. A plethora of nuclear historical information is available from many sources.

Thanks to the hard work of many individuals, large numbers of sightings at sensitive installations have been documented and put into databases for study. The time is right to put new efforts into understanding the historical significance of these military UFO sightings.

If indeed, these events are as relational as it now seems, we may begin to understand their role.

Imagine that!

Received New EMail

From: rduvall1@xxxxx.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 2:26 PM
To: xxxxx@bibliotecapleyades.net
Subject: Contatto dal dominio www.bibliotecapleyades.net


I am the author of the “Nuclear Historical Correlative Research” article on the NICAP website.

A long time ago I discovered that our policy and developments were very closely tracked by some “others” and at specific critical times during that history we were and continue to be warned. I learned of the ancient presence and the existence of a record with regard to this presence.

The first observations were pictorial in nature – old frescos and paintings, petroglyphs and other ancient crude recordings. I knew early on that the church had knowledge of this history and while blatantly displaying it throughout the world, they were actively denying to the masses that such matters had merit.

I have been to the Vatican. I know. I decided that in order to understand the nature of current activity relative to our nuclear ambitions I needed to have a contextual reference – a good understanding of the past. I read many books on this matter, but eventually focused on Sitchin. I was dismissive about his interpretation of the apocalyptic nature of Nibiru’s encounter with Earth.

It really seemed like he was choosing interpretation to fit his hypotheses – something to be avoided if you want to be taken seriously. I am still reticent to some degree on this. But, I also know the incredible merits and accuracy of the rest of that recorded history.

So it becomes difficult to discount.

The arguments presented on this very informative website have really brought this historical account into focus. I am not sure at this point how this affects the context I seek regarding what I have studied about the events taking place since WW2. I have read a small portion of what you offer on your website.

It was selective reading to address specific points I was struggling with. While I think I have a good understanding of the events of our history now, I still lack a contextual relationship to our nuclear era interference. I would appreciate any direction to specific reading or even better, your insight on this concern.

I am looking for the reason that his activity is important regarding our decisions between now and the supposed catastrophic events of Nibiru-Earth interaction.

Warmest regards,

Robert Duvall

You may also like...