It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Nick Pope, UFO documents and the Ministry of Defence

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 12:08 PM
Dr David Clarke (a skeptical academic in the UK that acts as a consultant to the National Archives in relation to the releases of UFO documents, and author of several UFO books) has just released an interesting article on his blog about Nick Pope and Ministry of Defence documents.

Many of you will be familiar with Nick Pope's name. Others can read more about him in the relevant blog article or can watch the video below of one of Nick Pope's presentations:

Dave Clarke's article includes the following:

Within the next 18 months the Ministry of Defence will complete their disclosure programme of UFO-related documents.

But some UFOlogists continue to demand they “come clean on all levels”. They believe there are more secret documents being held back that contain evidence of alien visitations.

I can reveal the only documents MoD intends to permanently conceal from the public concern their secret dealings not with aliens, but with a former member of their own staff – Nick Pope.

In his judgement the Information Commissioner reveals that MoD informed him on 6 January 2010 that Nick Pope “has written to the MoD and asked for the information not to be released into the public domain.”

Given the “fine balance” on disclosure, Nick’s direct intervention had provided “a contributing factor to support the withholding of the information.”


An indication of their tone and content is given in section 17 of the disclosure notice which says "several of the documents...contain expressions of opinion about the individual". Expressions of opinion are exempt from disclosure under Section 40(2) of the FOIA as they constitute personal data as defined by the Data Protection Act.

All the best,


[edit on 30-7-2010 by IsaacKoi]

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 12:39 PM
Well, this has came as a bit of a surprise to me. Ive always respected what Nick Pope has had to say on the UFO subject, he seems to be pretty genuine and doesnt come out with outlandish claims. I'd consider him much more trustworthy than the Greer and wilcock types, but you have to ask, what is in these documents that he doesnt want known?.

There is always that chance that he is in fear of being ridiculed, maybe because of some of comment made in a report to the MoD, during one of these UFO investigations. Whatever these documents contain, i think its time they came to light.

Nick Pope worked for the MoD, in that case whatever files the MoD see fit to release, should be released, regardless of Nick Popes opinion.

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:01 PM
My definition of a trustworthy person don't exactly include an ex defence minister, a british one at that.

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:12 PM
Its not really surprising.

Nick Pope was a fairly junior civil servant in the MoD. Being in the ministry doesn't make you a minister...

He was a very small cog doing a job that people before would have done unnoticed, of which a small portion was responding to the public reports related to aircraft (including UFOs). So far so humdrum.

Were it not for the X Files success in the 90s things would have likely continued as before.

However, with the PR exposure came the opportunity for fame and a more interesting career as a writer and media expert on UFOs. He's still doing it.

It seems possible that his reticence stems from a document either describing his attitudes to the topic before embarking on the media job, or an admittance of his future plans to his bosses while still in post.

He seems a fairly sane and pleasant person and what he's doing is not wrong. He was in the right place at the right time and he's protecting his interest. Its understandable.

Nobody is forced to give credence to his opinions, attend his speeches or buy his books.

He's not out selling snake oil and taking advantage of the needy like some others who could be mentioned.

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:32 PM
just some green-eyed wannabe who are jelous of nicks success.

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:50 PM

Originally posted by justwokeup
Nick Pope was a fairly junior civil servant in the MoD. Being in the ministry doesn't make you a minister...

Right, that's strange i always thought he's been at such level in the hierachy , my bad then. Nervertheless, the second part of the matter remain.It's fifty-fifty for nicky

[edit on 30-7-2010 by themaster1]

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:23 PM
i asked nick what this was all about and this is what he said.

A ufologist made an FOI request for documents about my non-MoD work as an author, journalist and TV pundit, then got upset when MoD said these were private papers.

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 11:58 PM
This story is now being reported by the mainstream media in England.

The website of the Sunday Express has the following article:


The release of files about a Ministry of Defence civil
servant-turned-UFO expert has been blocked.

Nick Pope has drawn on his experiences working for Britain's
official UFO investigation unit for a number of books about
aliens and strange sights in the skies.

Fellow UFO researcher David Clarke made a Freedom of Information
request in 2007 for internal MoD documents about Mr Pope's
decision to speak publicly about his conversion from sceptic to
believer in the possibility that extra-terrestrials are visiting

[edit on 31-7-2010 by IsaacKoi]

posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 12:44 AM
The infighting, smear campaigns and general BS in the "filed of ufology" turns my stomach sometimes. Yes, there is a need or place for skeptics and the need to "keep honest people honest", granted. But man, sometimes it gets so petty and ridiculous....

posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 07:37 AM
Well from what ive read, theres nothing much to this story, and certainly nothing that discredits Nick.

A request has been made to ask for the files relating to the MOD's response to Nick starting to talk publicly about ufo's and the reply was no.

I talk to Nick quite frequently online and he let us know a few weeks ago that this story would be coming out in the foreseeable future.

Nick is one of the only ufologists that i know who will take time out of his schedule to respond to your questions / queries.

posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:21 AM
i just found something that tells things a bit diferently at which totally does my head in. I dunno what to think now..

posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 03:44 PM

Originally posted by zeetroyman
Well from what ive read, theres nothing much to this story,

Can you post any links to what you've read that aren't included above?

By the way, Nick has posted slightly more detailed comments at:

Dave Clake responded at:

posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 04:14 PM
ive never been impressed with nick pope to be honest, my opinion is that he likes to make out that he knows more than he actually does just to sell books etc etc... then he uses his confidentially clause as a get out of jail card.

my honest opinion is that if he really did know something then he would tell all but instead he just strings people along and uses their need to believe and his old position as a selling tool.

i have no problem with him making a career out of it but i just wish he wouldnt do it the way he does.



posted on Aug, 6 2010 @ 05:10 AM
doesnt anyone think its strange that within days of this story breaking the national archives proves that we have an open government by releasing a batch of mod documents? i think they are trying to bury the story about these documents being covered up.

posted on Nov, 7 2010 @ 11:10 AM
This is one of the sleazier efforts in recent memory. The only thing demonstrated here is Clarke's cowardice, he always runs away from criticism and never mans up and addresses it, dishonesty and hypocrisy. He's a public figure himself. Where's his personnel file? Why won't he defend his sleazy publicly disseminated work?

From Clarke's blog:

For the record, the MoD have made it clear: "there is and never has been any such thing as a UFO Project". What's more, spokesperson Linda Unwin, in an article published by the MoD's own in-house magazine Focus (2006), said: 'There is no UFO project.' As Linda was the MoD's UFO desk officer from 2003-2007 she would have known if such a 'project' existed!

Well, here's what Unwin said . . .

The first point to make is that there is no 'UFO Project.' The policy is quite simple: we only look at these reports to establish whether there might be anything of defence significance, such as an unauthorised or hostile aircraft in UK airspace. This work is ongoing and we are keen to continue releasing information into the public domain.

Simple policy . . . look at reports . . .work is ongoing . . . but it isn't a project . . .
I'd call it a project. Any rational person would call it a project. The dictionary calls it a project. Basing your non-argument on government weasel-wording and then refusing to address it is contemptible.
edit on 7-11-2010 by UFO Partisan because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-11-2010 by UFO Partisan because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 7 2010 @ 11:25 AM
The MOD have released all documents held by them into the public domain.

Any requests made via the freedom of information act will be told this. Any subsequent investigations dont exist. No gun camera footage is available as it was never taken.

As per usual if they, the PTB say they are releasing all the info the real meaning is likely to be they are covering up the real info. They no longer have docs to release as they have already and there is no department dealing with this.

A dead end for anyone seeking information.

I dont think Pope is a fraud I just think he does not know anymore than anyone else on this subject but he does have a govenment pension and a profitable hobby.

posted on Nov, 7 2010 @ 11:54 AM
I generally like Clarke's work and Pope has just been making a living out of being the tea boy at the ministry. However, if Clarke really thinks Pope's personnel files are up for scrutiny he's living in cloud cuckoo land.Once you sign the Official secrets act that's it. in fact by telling anyone you have signed it you are breaking it

I suspect this might all stem from the Rendlesham case . Clarke invested a lot of credibility in his lengthy analysis and Nick has blown a huge hole in that work.

new topics

top topics


log in