Air Force UFO Rules Vanish After Inquiry

[Skymon876]

Air Force UFO Rules Vanish After Huffington Post Inquiry

The military deleted a passage about unidentified flying objects from a 2008 Air Force personnel manual just days after The Huffington Post asked Pentagon officials about the purpose of the UFO section.

 

[Rramjet]

Air Force UFO Rules Vanish After Huffington Post Inquiry

The military deleted a passage about unidentified flying objects from a 2008 Air Force personnel manual just days after The Huffington Post asked Pentagon officials about the purpose of the UFO section.

What I find interesting about that report is not the implied conspiracy surrounding the removal of reference to UFOs in the personnel manual, but the following statement from NORAD:

”When I talk about UFOs, it is literally an unidentified flying object, not an extraterrestrial," said John Cornelio, chief of media relations at NORAD headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo. "There is a blip on the radar, and we don't know what it is. And we're responsible for identifying what that object is. We know it's an aircraft of some sort, but we don't know who it is, and so have to go up and identify it." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/19/air-force-deletes-ufo-rep_n_982128.html)
​

Some things of note in that statement:

First ‘blips’ on the radar are assumed to be objects (ie; something real), indicating that the UFO debunker’s Anomalous Propagation (AP) events are simply “not on the radar” (both literally and figuratively).

Second that they DO send aircraft up after UFOs.

Third, when they do that, they must be USAF aircraft with USAF pilots.

So in that regard, when the USAF stated in reply to The Huffington Post’s enquiry:

”UFO reporting is a NORAD requirement, but not a requirement for Air Force operational reports"
​

We then have to ask what the pilots sent up by NORAD after UFOs then report their operational activity back to the USAF as…

And finally in regard to secrecy (again from NORAD):

"But at the end of the day, it's not our job to identify every unidentified object that's out there. I'm aware of the process by which the command center handles these things, and I don't believe it's something that's releasable."
​

So there IS a SECRET ‘process’…

The bottom line here is that UFOs are spotted on radar, planes are sent up to identify them, and what happens after that is secret…

So if UFOs really are (as the debunker’s and the USAF would have us believe) misidentified mundane objects, hoaxes, etc …why the secrecy?

 

[bbridges]

There you go again, confronting the problem with secrecy. The old, 'no comment' left unstated that marches straight into oblivion, or to use an old Air Force lyric, "Into the wide (wild?) blue yonder..."--which, of course, opens the door for 'conspiracies, the counterintelligence playground. "All aboard (a-bored?)", blow the whistle, and let's get movin down the track..."

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Well I try again seems the computer went ping and BB spot on currently enjoy reading Mrs Georgina Bruni book "You Can't Tell The People" (2000) those "conspiracies' most likely jump on the its date of release and then 2001? I find Col Halts testimony as the clincher and of course former "British Prime Minister Lady Thatcher but maybe it was counter-intelligence at work who knows? "interesting as well were these related to the network of nuclear shelters ?and the Stafford incident in 1960s? Were all the documents released? Also the other incidents through out the UK nuclear shelters/storage in 1980s . Gene did ever interview the late Mrs Bruni?

 

[Rramjet]

There you go again, confronting the problem with secrecy. The old, 'no comment' left unstated that marches straight into oblivion, or to use an old Air Force lyric, "Into the wide (wild?) blue yonder..."--which, of course, opens the door for 'conspiracies, the counterintelligence playground. "All aboard (a-bored?)", blow the whistle, and let's get movin down the track..."

I have not “confronted” anything with “secrecy” (or conspiracies or anything of the like). I merely noted that official secrecy exists. Let me ask you - What is it in the following statement from NORAD that allows you to conclude that secrecy is not a real factor?

"But at the end of the day, it's not our job to identify every unidentified object that's out there. I'm aware of the process by which the command center handles these things, and I don't believe it's something that's releasable." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/19/air-force-deletes-ufo-rep_n_982128.html)

 

[bbridges]

oops, I failed to capture the sarcasm intended by my post, Rramjet. To clarify (though I am loath to have to explain a joke) the "There you go again stuff was supposed to represent the Air Force position, not your quite accurate argument revealing the lack of forthrightness by them, Forgive me for not capturing that in my post, Rramjet. Richard

 

[Xylo]

Interesting. So if they discover the identity of the unknown, that means there would be a paper trail of sorts. I wonder how many chinese lanterns, RC airplanes, ultralights and balloons they've identified, and what the percentage of "known" to "unknown" actually is.

 

[bbridges]

The "known' unknowns, lanterns, birds, etc. are not the issue are they? It's "what's left," which might include that of which they are forbidden to speak for reasons they classify as 'matters of National [In]Security.' That covers a multitude of possibilities. Alexander notwithstanding, I think that when exotic unknowns are determined to be the 'what's left,' that there is a procedure routing the data to an unknown hierarchy coalescing the new info into an already existing database, available to a very select group, unknown to almost everyone. I realize that I'm resurrecting the tired old 'conspiracy' rift, but there it is. Having spoken with with such a wide variety of project managers, engineers, military, civilians, and spooks over the years, I am still reasonably sure that it works that way-and also certain that I'll never know for certain. Sometimes the most revealing stuff has gotten out, but with no way to confirm it, it is safely ignored with impunity, thereby nullifying its potential significance, and merely swims in the sea of possibility, speculation, and disinformation/misinformation. No need to confirm or deny, just ignore.

 

[wrightpat AFB]

Very interesting, but par for the course concerning USAF. Unfortunately in this situation much like other bits and pieces of information every sub divided department of our, USA military has it's own set of documentation standards that differ. This is done for security reasons, but one might easily come to the conclusion that this just adds to a disinformation campaign for putting two and two together. Shouldn't the USAF organization wide adopt a standard that requires all branches of it's services to react and document all UFO encounters the same across the board? A blip is a blip is a blip. Not going to happen in my lifetime....