MJ12. Thoughts please.

Originally posted by Decoy
Hi all,
Friedman found and photographed an onion copy of a memo at the National Archives from a high up whitehouse man in which Majestic 12 was mentioned. That was years ago and the memo was from many years ago, if I recall correctly, under Truman.

The Cutler/Twining Memo is probably fake too, I'm afraid!

First of all it wasn't found by Friedman. It was found by Shandera and Moore. See my own and Kandinsky's assessments (posted in "brief" above) of how Moore is up to his knees in the fakery regarding MJ-12.

(In 1985), a happenstance request from Friedman unlocked the mystery: busy due to previous obligations, Friedman asked Moore and Shandera to examine newly declassified Air Force documents at the National Archives (NARA) repository in Suitland, Maryland; the head archivist there was named Ed Reese.

After a few days in Suitland, Shandera and Moore discovered yet another MJ-12 document, the so-called Cutler/Twining memo, dated July 14, 1954. Interestingly enough, the memo turned up in "Box 189" of the record group. In this memo, NSC Executive Secretary and Eisenhower’s National Security Advisor Robert Cutler informed Air Force Chief of Staff (and alleged MJ-12 member) Nathan Twining of a change of plans in a scheduled MJ-12 briefing.

The Cutler-Twining memo lacked a distinctive catalog number, leading many to suspect that whether hoaxed or genuine, the memo was almost certainly planted in the archives.

Moore and Shandera have been accused of hoaxing the memo and then planting it in the archives.

The National Archives and Records Administration also issued a detailed list of ten problems calling the Cutler/Twining memo into question. I have put the list in the next post of this thread in case you are interested.

Incidentally, some authors who claim to have insider knowledge, have put forward the hypothesis that MJ-12, if they exist, are actually involved with secret black projects other than UFOs and ET studies and the aliens thing is just a deception operation. Just saying...

reply to post by Decoy

The Cutler/Twining Memo (See post above)

The (National Archives and Records Administration) has issued a detailed list of problems which calls the Cutler memo's authenticity into question.

1. The document was located in Record Group 341, entry 267. The series is filed by a Top Secret register number. This document does not bear such a number.

2. The document is filed in the folder T4-1846. There are no other documents in the folder regarding "NSC/MJ-12."

3. Researchers on the staff of the National Archives have searched in the records of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, and in other related files. No further information has been found on this subject.

4. Inquiries to the U.S. Air Force, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the National Security Council failed to produce further information.

5. The Freedom of Information Office of the National Security Council informed the National Archives that "Top Secret Restricted Information" is a marking which did not come into use at the National Security Council until the Nixon Administration. The Eisenhower Presidential Library also confirms that this particular marking was not used during the Eisenhower Administration.

6. The document in question does not bear an official government letterhead or watermark. The NARA conservation specialist examined the paper and determined it was a ribbon copy (i.e. not a carbon copy) prepared on "dictation onionskin." The Eisenhower Library has examined a representative sample of the documents in its collection of the Cutler papers. All documents in the sample created by Mr. Cutler while he served on the NSC staff have an eagle watermark in the bond paper. The onionskin carbon copies have either an eagle watermark or no watermark at all. Most documents sent out by the NSC were prepared on White House letterhead paper. For the brief period when Cutler left the NSC, his carbon copies were prepared on "prestige onionskin."

7. The National Archives searched the Official Meeting Minute Files of the National Security Council and found no record of an NSC meeting on July 16, 1954. A search of all NSC Meeting Minutes for July 1954 found no mention of MJ-12 nor Majestic.

8. The Judicial, Fiscal and Social Branch searched the indices of the NSC records and found no listing for: MJ-12, Majestic, unidentified flying objects, UFO, flying saucers, or flying discs.

9. NAJA found a memo in a folder titled "Special Meeting July 16, 1956" which indicated that NSC members would be called to a civil defense exercise on July 16, 1956.

10. The Eisenhower Library states, in a letter to the Military Reference Branch, dated July 16, 1987: "president Eisenhower's Appointment Books contain no entry for a special meeting on July 16, 1954 which might have included a briefing on MJ-12. Even when the President had 'off the record' meetings, the Appointment Books contain entries indicating the time of the meeting and the participants ...

"The Declassification office of the National Security Council has informed us that it has no record of any declassification action having been taken on this memorandum or any other documents on this alleged project ..."

Robert Cutler, at the direction of President Eisenhower, was visiting overseas military installations on the day he supposedly issued this memorandum − July 14, 1954. The Administration Series in Eisenhower's Papers as President contains Cutler's memorandum and report to the President upon his return from the trip. The memorandum is dated July 20, 1954 and refers to Cutler's visits to installations in Europe and North Africa between July 3 and 15. Also, within the NSC Staff Papers is a memorandum dated July 3, 1954, from Cutler to his two subordinates, James S. Lay and J. Patrick Cone, explaining how they should handle NSC administrative matters during his absence; one would assume that if the memorandum to Twining were genuine, Lay or Cone would have signed it."

In addition, although the Cutler memo was supposedly a carbon copy, it was folded as if it had been in a shirt pocket, which would be unusual for a carbon copy put in a file. The memo is in the National Archives; the question is how it got there, and if it is authentic.

SOURCE: uforna.net...

The think the MJ 12 was a coven of witches (or warlocksw/e you prefer)

They were dealing with the spirit entities manifested by Crowley, Jack Parsons, and L Ron Hubbard.



They were very much like the Collins Elite, just far far more adept in the Craft.

Originally posted by curiousrb
Do you think the MJ12 group was a real group. I have a source that would say yes. They were thought to be ''If real'' a government group that really was above top secret which investigated extraterrestrial matters. Many of the documents they brought up were terminated but I want to know if you think they were a myth or an actual group?

I do.

That's a pretty old subject. There must be some older in-depth threads already on ATS.

If you had any damn clue about the UFO and MJ12 you would recognize that I in fact was far more relevant than ye.

Jack Parsons (NASA JPL, Ordo Templi Orientis) Alistar Crowley (Thelema, OTO), L Ron Hubbard (OTO, Scientology) . . . .

they were performing rituals AT ROSWELL






Wake the F up dude and research the mystery schools, then come back and claim I am not relevant.


LOL

Hell Skull and Bones members (Prescott Bush's class) were the first recruiters for the CIA.


Ever heard of Ian Fleming (aka 007?)

The real 007 was JOHN DEE a court magician (Enochian Magic)


Just look at the symbolism of all the MI5, CIA seals. . .







LoL

reply to post by MasterGemini

Bury my relevant comments on the Cutler Twining Memo, within minutes, will you? OK, let's get flippant....

I think they are real because John Lear's mother said so!!!

I'm not joking, she really did say so....

And she (Lear's mother) called up and she said, “Jimmy (Doolittle, USAF Lt Gen), how’re you doing and dadadada, and by the way, John’s interested in this stuff, and I just want to know, was Majestic 12 real”? And he said “Yes, Moya, but I can’t say anything about it”. That for me was, you know, the beginning of everything - because, if Majestic 12 is real, it’s a possibility the briefing papers are real and, if they were real, then everything else was real.

SOURCE: John Lear Tells All - Part 1 (Project Camalot Interview transcript)

Hey, clown, I was clowning OK.

Calm down dear. I have looked into the very same mystery schools in a different context. Sorry mate, no offence intended.

Originally posted by MasterGemini
Jack Parsons (NASA JPL, Ordo Templi Orientis) Alistar Crowley (Thelema, OTO), L Ron Hubbard (OTO, Scientology) . . . .

they were performing rituals AT ROSWELL

Sorry again, about the clowning. My sense of humour sometimes inadvertently offends....

Do you have some direct evidence that they were actually performing rituals at Roswell? Link or thread?

I was thinking we were off topic but I guess we aren't really....

reply to post by curiousrb


12 members of Majestic....

12 Regions to the Federal Reserve System..... Hmmmm.....

I find the MJ12 documents to be a very interesting read (I haven't read all of them, but I'm half way through at the moment). The major problem I can see with this whole debate is that no matter how much evidence is found that authenticates these documents there will always be more evidence that these are forgeries. Some of the documents have all the right formating, stamps, procedures, etc... from the time period they were supposedly wrote in, but anyone can say, "Whomever forged these simple did there research". I find it tough to believe in these documents when there are so many arguments against them.

I also find some of the chapters strange, take the SOM1-01 manual, chapter 2, section 2, titled "Descriptions of Extraterrestrial Biological Entities (EBEs)", sub-section 10. I find it strange because the description of the bodies is very peculiar; there are very specific details of the bodies (feet, back, etc...). This would imply a body was examined (no contact with a live EBE, unless it is a custom to get naked and check each other out). Meaning scientists would have been able to study the internals of the EBEs. This troubles me because of the regulations in chapter 5, section 1, sub-section 3, paragraph b, line 3: "Since little is known about EBE biological functions, aid will be confined to the stopping of bleeding, bandaging of wounds, and splintering of broken limbs." I won't put it past the US government to be redundant, but this to me sounds strange. Why have a manual identifying EBEs, their crafts, etc... and not have specifics on medical treatments? The only ones reading this manual would be those with a high enough security clearance to do so - so why not have the specifics? It could be that this could be a rough draft of some sort, or the MJ12 group didn't want to reveal all their intel, but this seems fishy to me.

In conclusion - I'm a skeptic who wants to believe, but am forced not to. Although I believe in the existence of ETs and that governments would cover up the fact that they exist for many reasons, these documents, in my opinion, should not be taken as authentic unless better evidence to the contrary is brought forward.

On a side note, isn't it interesting that everyone needs evidence that ETs are real? We imply they cannot exist, should be that we need evidence that ETs aren't real? Maybe it's just me...

First post!

Originally posted by curiousrb
Do you think the MJ12 group was a real group. I have a source that would say yes. They were thought to be ''If real'' a government group that really was above top secret which investigated extraterrestrial matters. Many of the documents they brought up were terminated but I want to know if you think they were a myth or an actual group?

Prepare yourself for all the non-mods directing you use the search function. Lol. While partially true, and a valuable resource, the old threads may not address all of the issues. Additionally they might not address any of the questions you have and they might not contain any updates and/or new information. I have found that adding new posts to old threads doesn't usually illicit sustantial conversation. People forget about threads and get bored with them.

Like others have posted before me, I do believe such a group existed/exists, however, I do believe the documents to be fake. This group could be named MJ-12, but probably I would guess we'll never know. Hell, the military has managed to keep the true and secret name of Seal Team 6 a secret all this time, even after killing OBL; I'm pretty sure they could keep an undisclosed secret group dedicated to the R&D of captured UFO technology a secret too. Lol.

Perphaps the documents are a disinformation ploy? Other than a good hoax, I'm not sure what they motive was in the documents. Maybe I will take another look at them? lol

reply to post by Pimander


Great post!
2nd

reply to post by Pimander


I think you are probably right about MJ-12 being involved in projects other than UFO's. Especially if those black projects utilized R&D from UFO technology.

reply to post by NullEgo
That's a thoughtful post - good début and first star (fwiw).

The thing reeks to high heaven straight away...



It's so mega-secret the only guys allowed to read it have to be reminded by all this drama on the cover?! Would they also need to be reminded that it's all 'compartmentalized?' Seems to me, the guys who came up with this had their audience and purpose in mind...

With each piece of writing you will be tested on your understanding of genre, audience, purpose and style, so you need to be clear about the kind of writing you are aiming for - who exactly are you writing for and what you are trying to tell them?

BBC schools website

The terminology wouldn't be necessary if the 'audience' was senior scientists and guys already in the know. Instead the audience are those who explicitly are not in the know and the purpose is to mislead the same audience into believing the contents will be real. It's the exact same promotional BS found on magazine and DVD covers that promises juicy photos or 'shocking' scenes.



More BS. Why would a 'manual' need to keep overstating how bloody secret it is? As if the cover hadn't already made the point, the writer has to keep reminding the reader.

Originally posted by curiousrb
Do you think the MJ12 group was a real group. I have a source that would say yes. They were thought to be ''If real'' a government group that really was above top secret which investigated extraterrestrial matters. Many of the documents they brought up were terminated but I want to know if you think they were a myth or an actual group?

Here's who I think is your MJ-12 or "Shadow Government."

link

reply to post by Kandinsky
Very late reply I reckon.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
So...when Randle looked into Willingham he found a man who hadn't served and certainly hadn't been a colonel. He'd lied about his record and the crash story had a dozen differences relating to time of month and even year.

On that basis, it's fair to assume, on probability, that the whole story was fabricated. Would you agree?

As I explained it is fairly common practice in intelligence business to "hoaxify" (yay, let's invent words!!) a document.

In particular, either to protect it from being believed as true, or when the leak has already happened, to litterally amplify the flood with "fake-real" documents.

So it is too easy to get to the "obvious" conclusion that it is a hoax based on elements. And that's the most difficult part of the job : finding what part is the real part, and what part is the hoaxed part. There exists almost as much probability that it is a reforged original or a completely hoaxed story.

Simply adding a date in Moore's favourite (and unique) format would be enough for 99.9% of the people (who know a bit their ways in the story) to classify it immediately as a fake or a hoax. However...

However, if the leak had occured already, and someone, somewhere (in summertime) wanted to prevent any damage with this leak (such an event is a HUGE thing), if I were to be that someone, I would certainly use that technique. Put that date (or a photocopied Truman signature, why not? ) and let it out. It will be automatically dismissed.

And assuming the story is real, it wouldn't be the first time that some personal records are unobtainable...

reply to post by Kandinsky


I also would like to point out that in the book, Top Secret/MAJIC, by the physicist Friedman in the intro he highlights how fascinated he was with the gullibility of people once they found him to be a highly educated individual. He highlights how easily people become sheep and then goes into his UFO MJ12 story right after that.

Just go watch a Penn and Teller show and they will admit to using misdirection to keep people looking in the wrong direction. Just add a bit of emotion into the mix such as laughter and people will loose their ability to think critically.

Also if you cant find any documentation of L Ron Hubbard, Jack Parsons, and Crowley meeting up than you have not even bothered to look.

reply to post by Kandinsky

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Why would a 'manual' need to keep overstating how bloody secret it is? As if the cover hadn't already made the point, the writer has to keep reminding the reader.

Well, I can promise you that it is perfectly common to see those kind of reminders everywhere in protected material.

I am retyping here, letter for letter, a paragraph extracted from the telephone directory of where I work:

For security reasons the document is classified PROTECT - STAFF. Given the present security alert state, the document should be afforded the appropriate protection and under no circumstances is it to be displayed in public establishments.

And this is only from a telephone directory. That's really not a very high level of classification, everyone would agree to this

So I am sorry but your argument that the security reminders are out of place is essentially wrong. This is very common, on the contrary.

However, I will gladly agree that this:

looks a bit too much. However, who am I to say that it is not real...

Originally posted by curiousrb
reply to post by redbarron626

 

I'm just trying to get some opinions and insight for research.

If you would like to research use the search function here on ATS be sure to have plenty time up your sleeve as MJ12 has been discussed numerous times

reply to post by SpookyVince

So I am sorry but your argument that the security reminders are out of place is essentially wrong.

We'll agree to disagree about that because I stand by it. You even agree that the snip I used 'looks a bit too much' which is contradicting any notion of my point being 'essentially wrong.' You must have meant 'partially wrong.'

As far as it stands, a few stragglers remain convinced that some parts of some MJ-12 docs were real whilst fewer still swallow the entire lot as real. I've re-read this thread and notice that I already stated my opinion, and why I hold it. I also expressed the view that it's okay to disagree and I hold no compulsion to change your mind about MJ-12 documents. If you choose to believe they are real, after consideration, that's fine by me.

ETA: Whereas I used a little critical thinking to draw conclusions, CUFOS also dismissed the doc as fake by use of expertise and experience. If you choose to read the link, be sure to read the credentials of the contributors too.

(1) Documents and materials with high classifications have special provisions attached to them to ensure the ability to trace them at all times and to verify their integrity, until they are destroyed or declassified. The security markings on the SOM 1-01 document do not conform to required security procedures established for all agencies by presidential executive orders. In some instances they are totally contrary to established security procedures. No internal evidence exists in the document to show that proper accountability was exercised by the document's custodians.

(2) The inclusion of some accurate information has been cited as proof of authenticity, whereas it could equally well be interpreted as a cut-and-paste job to lend an air of authenticity. Partially legitimate but altered UFO-related documents are already known to exist.

(3) The content of the manual is strikingly inappropriate for its stated purpose. A field manual for dealing with crashed craft and alien bodies would have no reason to include (a) information on UFO history, (b) a chart of UFO types, (c) information concerning radar detection of UFOs, (d) a list of natural and artificial aerial phenomena which can be mistaken for UFOs.

(4) Military manuals of this type establish standards and define tasks which must be performed to accomplish the mission. The manual fails to establish such standards and is completely silent on personnel qualifications and equipment requirements. Furthermore, the methods of recovery and site security described inthe manual are inadequate and tactically unsound. Regulations, materials, and training publication references cited are grossly inadequate or completely missing.

JOINT STATEMENT ON SOM-01-1 MANUAL PURPORTING TO CONFIRM MJ-12

reply to post by Kandinsky

Originally posted by Kandinsky
You even agree that the snip I used 'looks a bit too much' which is contradicting any notion of my point being 'essentially wrong.' You must have meant 'partially wrong.'

Well, yes, probably. It is true that I have a doubt on the top part (the one pic I reposted). It looks "a bit too much" as I said, but now this being agreed, I surely don't have access to such levels of classification. I therefore can't be accustomed to the kind of reminders they potentially use or not this high.

What I really meant with my post is that, it is impossible to decide whether those docs are faked, partially faked/real, or real based on the security warnings. Those warnings are indeed quite common (and most of the times terribly annoying because "we all know about that sh...t" ).

Also, I have to agree in the most part with the quote you post from CUFOS (and I treat that source as a highly credible source), however again, based on the conclusions that the documents are probably a construction based on real docs and a collection of forgeries/fake/etc., I'd say there probably is a part of truth, a part of real, in that doc, and that is reinforced by paragraph (2) in your post:

Partially legitimate but altered UFO-related documents are already known to exist.

That's the most difficult job in this type of investigation. Separate false and real info.

Until there is definitely more facts on those (by any means, will there any day have more factual info on those?), I will stick with my gut feeling that at least a part of it can be considered real, while the rest was erased/modified/fabricated to cast doubt on it.

Remember that day when ( Edited here: removed "Shandera", added : ) Moore was handed a teletype by Doty, straight out of the teletype machine? Days later, he had to give it to Bennewitz, but it wasn't the same document anymore...

It's a game of "I'll show you the truth, but in a way that makes it impossible for people to believe it is real, because part of it is not". Very, very difficult...

Edited to correct: