A MONTHLY COMMUNICATION: DIFFICULTIES WITH THE CHOSEN ONES
Number 8/9, March/April 1998
Please accept my apologies for the delay in producing this bumper, double issue. No 8 was ready to go when the first Jason Andrews article appeared in the SUN. Because a number of people contacted me for information, I decided to see the press coverage, obtain the book, and put issues 8 and 9 together in order to provide, in the only UK publication committeed to dealing with alien abduction, some coherent coverage of this tragic case. By chance, the OVNI article turned up a couple of days later, and then the ‘Nazi UFO’ material from Martin Kottmeyer. I hope you’ll think the wait was worth it. We’ll be back to normal in May.
Tony Dodd and Jason Andrews – chosen by aliens?
You’re probably aware of the 4-day serialisation in the SUN of the story of the supposed 14-year old abductee, Jason Andrews. With luck, you may also have seen the cogent, but sad, account of James Dalrymple in the Daily Mail, attempting to interview Jason. He found that the child had little to say, being repeatedly answered for by the co-authors of ‘Abducted – The True Story of Alien Abduction in Rural England’ – his mother, Ann Andrews, and writer Jean Ritchie. The book is published by Headline, at £16.99, and I advise you to buy it if you wish to understand how the abduction belief is spread and nurtured, and how very, very close it has come to being a cult, with its own creed, priests and prophets. It might be best not to order the book from your library: you wouldn’t want other children to pick it up and be convinced by its extraordinary claims. To be going on with, here’s my view of some of the more immediate issues. I’ve tried not to quote too much, but there is an issue of public interest and child protection here, and it is also important to report accurately, rather than just pick out the most disturbing sentences in an undoubtedly disturbing book.
At last, after years of rumours, circumlocutions, and seemingly groundless assertions of the reality of the abduction of those he has investigated, the book sets out Tony Dodd’s perception of his own relationship to aliens and abductions. As does a letter to a recent magazine. I can now understand why some apparently intelligent elements in ufology present Dodd as a powerful and mysterious figure who possesses information and understanding that the rest of us don’t. One suggested that, if I was lucky, I might be allowed to enter Dodd’s “inner sanctum”. I hadn’t realised why so many of the references had a religious, mystical overtone. Now, perhaps I do.
Let’s look at the evidence of the beliefs of the man who has undoubtedly had the greatest influence in forming opinion about alien abduction and mutilation in this country, and who is held by many abroad to speak with authority on both subjects. In a letter to veteran UFO and Flying Triangle investigator Omar Fowler, published in the March/April 1998 edition of Fowler’s magazine OVNI, Dodd writes
“I have no doubt whatsoever that some of the flying triangles witnessed over the past few years are of terrestrial origin. I am fairly certain also that some of the huge triangular craft seen in Scotland and in the Arctic Circle both entering and leaving the sea are extraterrestrial. My information from highly placed sources indicates that there is without doubt liaison going on between a race of ETs and our own people. There is also substantial information that another race of ET with malevolent intent is visiting us. It would appear that we are being given advanced technology by the friendly ET to enable us to defend against the unfriendly, hence the new generation of triangular aircraft. The weapons in use appear to be highly advanced particle beam weapons which have been used with great success.
This also confirms the reason why so many huge underground facilities have been appearing all over the globe when we are supposed to be living in a peace time environment. Of course the animal and human mutilation situation is part of all this.
With regard to your request for the verses which I received telepathically. As I said this was one of many messages I received . . ”
Dodd’s position is also clarified at various points in the book. Near the end the views of various abduction believers – John Mack, Nick Pope, Maria Ward, James Basil, and Dodd himself – are set out. Confirming the belief in direct contact reported in OVNI, the authors state that
“Tony Dodd agrees that being abducted should be regarded . . as the start of a spiritual journey. He has recorded the messages that he ‘receives’ in his brain from alien intelligences, and the recordings have been used to bring a great deal of spiritual comfort to many people, particularly to patients in hospices who are facing up to the end of their time on Earth.”
Accustomed as I am to reasonably high strangeness, this reference to “patients in hospices” astonishes me. While Christian – even Spiritualist – assurances of life after death are not uncommon among hospital and hospice staff and visitors, I’ve never heard of anything with an alien content. Presumably, Dodd’s ‘messages’ offer some kind of assurance of continued existence beyond death, based on interaction with “ETs”. Perhaps it’s the proverbial ‘we’ll be there to meet you’ promise.
I’ll refrain from further comment at this stage, and let Ritchie and Andrews explain more of Dodd’s experiences and beliefs
“Tony now feels that his initial experience of the UFO was a deliberate introduction engineered by the aliens. He believes he has been regularly abducted for many years . . chosen to pass on messages promoting world peace, and greater understanding of the cosmos. The messages ‘appear’ in his brain, and are so unlike any of his own, familiar, down-to-earth thought patterns that he feels sure they are planted there by benevolent aliens . . . Tony does not believe all aliens are benevolent, nor does he think the earth is simply being buzzed by one particular race of space beings, but by several. He subscribes to the view that world governments are involved in cover-ups, that they know far more about alien activity than they admit to the populace at large.
The authors give an account of an early contact with Jason. I have serious concerns about what Dodd apparently saw fit to say to Jason, then presumably 11 or 12 years old, soon after his parents were convinced by a television programme showing a regressed ‘abductee’ that alien abduction was the explanation for their child’s behaviour problems, contacted Dodd and asked for him to become involved in their situation. Direct quotes from Dodd are included
“Over the phone he described his own abduction to Jason, and admitted he was scared . . “They still come for me, and although I know that they mean me no harm – and have accepted it – it still scares the hell out of me . . Having seen their crafts and the awesome power they possess, I know that we can never stop them. How the hell do you fight something which can not only paralyse you, but can levitate you out of the house through solid walls?”
Again Dodd is quoted,
“I feel the aliens will follow him for many years to come, probably all his life. But he will come to terms with it. He’ll find a way of coping.
I think he may, eventually, prove to be a very important abductee. Some of the experiences he has had make me think he is being groomed as a “teacher”, a human who is entrusted by the aliens with messages for the whole of mankind.”
It appears that Dodd has, in Jason, identified somebody with very similar experiences – and powers – to his. Perhaps he thinks, as some cult leaders do, that he has found his successor, a young person able to perceive, and pass on, those messages from the aliens.
You may know that when Tony Dodd first wrote about this case in UFO Magazine for March/April 1996 I repeatedly questioned – as reported in my publication Promises & Disappointments – the claims he made in his article. Then, the child was identified as ‘Jason Williams’ and although only 11, the magazine chose to publish photos of him with only a black strip across his eyes, as well as photographs of the grounds around the family home.
I asked, particularly, whether Jason had really, as Dodd claimed, been “expelled from school for disruptive behaviour”. Whether he was “rushed into hospital” on “three separate occasions”, when “Disturbingly, on each occasion, Jason’s mother noticed a strange red circular mark on his stomach which she described as the size of her hand”, whether social services had been contacted about the supposedly mysterious injuries and needle marks the child was said to display, and about the supposedly extraordinary behaviour of MAFF, among other issues that seemed to make no sense at all. I ended up with a solicitor’s letter discouraging me from writing about the case: Dalrymple suggests that the family has been guaranteed £60,000 for the book and serialisation.
I’ll be reviewing the book for Fortean Times, and I suspect that in due course there will be substantial further coverage of this, the first UK book to go beyond half-baked case reporting, and set out the abduction faith in full. Looking at the facts, it seems that the book says that Jason wasn’t expelled from school, wasn’t rushed to hospital three times, and when he did go to hospital had different marks from those Dodd described. Dodd said Jason was 8 when the experiences started: the book says he was 4. The story about MAFF has changed drastically, with animals alive in one version, dead in the other, several vehicles calling to collect carcasses in one, only two in the other. The MAFF story still makes no sense at all.
What is clear from both versions is that this family had chosen to believe that their son’s disturbed behaviour – which had taken him previously to a child psychologist and various doctors – resulted from repeated abductions by alien beings, and had no other cause. They bought UFO books, immersed themselves in the culture, then sought out an investigator, and found Tony Dodd. It seems that, since then, all kinds of memories have – without the use of hypnotic regression – come flooding back. A national journalist, apparently of some standing, saw fit to write a book around Jason’s developing reminiscences and Dodd’s views on aliens, implants (Jason apparently has two) and the wonders of recovered memory. In line with some of the more oppressive US beliefs about abduction being a generational phenomenon, the mother believes herself to have been abducted, and has found an explanation for a miscarriage in the conviction that the foetus had been taken by aliens, and may have been an alien-human hybrid. The elder son now recounts encounters with aliens. And – echoing the success of witness support groups in the USA and elsewhere in keeping abductees on track, and supportive of the abduction belief – Jason has been taken round to meet and mix with other abductees, including Maria Ward and James Easton.
The family’s experiences fit neatly to Dodd’s templates for abductee experience, particularly re animal mutilation. Sadly, Ritchie seems to be unfamiliar with any other area of anomalous experience, of the development of cult behaviour and belief, or of the way in which a vulnerable, troubled child can be led, like so many other human beings, to believe in the reality of events which never occurred. She records, without apparent concern that when Jason went missing in the night, and his brother had informed the family that “the bastards have taken him again. I knew it was happening but I couldn’t move, I couldn’t stop it”, that another abductee decided that the Police should not be informed, or asked for assistance in finding him, because
“Going to the Police, when they already knew what the explanation for the disappearances was, would only make matters much worse for the boy . . ”
Sadly, the family was so convinced of the abduction explanation that it accepted this advice: advice I consider no parent should ever accept.
Ritchie seems to have done nothing to challenge the belief elements, to seek evidence from MAFF or the Police or the RSPCA as to whether the family had reported the criminal acts of hurting and wilfully killing animals. While regression has not been use here – it has hardly been necessary – she includes extensive support for the technique, and says nothing of the utter discrediting of the use of hypnotic regression as a tool for the accurate recovery of memory of actual events, or of the problems of false memory, where there is no objective, corroborative, evidence. And there is none here.
This is a sad, depressing, intrusive, inconsiderate case, where a child is being paraded for the media, and it is apparent that not everybody can have been telling the whole truth throughout the case. As we know, animal mutilations reported by Dodd seldom, if ever, get referred to the Police or RSPCA. Here, the dead animals just serve as evidence of a supposed interaction with ETs. As, pretty much, does Jason himself.
So now, we can reasonably speculate why Dodd does not respond to abducted and injured children, or mutilated and murdered animals, in the same way that most of us would. Why he does not – despite his own long service – take matters to the Police, or the RSPCA, so that they can be investigated by human beings, and perhaps be dealt with in human courts. It is not only reasonable to speculate. I suggest that it is actually in the public interest to do so.
I suspect that Dodd fails to make these contacts because “the animal and human mutilation situation is part of all this”. Because “I know that we can never stop them. How the hell do you fight something which can not only paralyse you, but can levitate you out of the house through solid walls?” Because “I wish I could promise Jason that it would stop one day, but it is unlikely. Having been selected for multiple abductions, I feel the aliens will follow him for many years to come, probably all his life.” And perhaps he doesn’t approach government departments, like MAFF, because “He subscribes to the view that world governments are involved in cover-ups, that they know far more about alien activity than they admit to the populace at large.” Why tell a minor government official what you believe his distant superiors already not only know, but are concealing from “the populace at large”?
I have absolutely no reason to doubt Tony Dodd’s sincerity, or his commitment to his role as a spokesman for ETs. But there is little reason to believe that without his involvement either the article or the book would ever have seen the light of day. Ritchie and the Andrews family may be open to criticism – as may the medical and social services that seem to have permitted this psychological tragedy to happen, when I know that I, at least, referred the matter to Kent Social Services and NSPCC in some detail – the focus should fall on Dodd at this stage. I understand that neither he nor his wife are in good health at present, and that he may have retired – permanently or temporarily – from active investigation. But even if that is the case, and while I wish him no personal harm, the legacy he has left in this book is just too dangerous, too threatening to the psychological health and peace of mind of other children and adults who may become convinced by its claims, not to challenge it, and not to seek an open debate as to the accuracy of its content.
One serious consequence of the way in which this child has been surrounded by abduction believers is demonstrated by another quote from the book
“The most dispiriting and depressing moment that I had while researching this book was when I asked Jason what the future held for him. He shrugged his shoulders and said that he did not see it ever getting any better, nor did he see himself ever learning to accept it. Chillingly, he told me how he had seriously contemplated suicide, even going so far as to take a rope into the woods in an attempt to hang himself . . suddenly, the reserve broke, and tears came to his eyes as he shouted angrily at ‘them’, the uninvited strangers who have robbed him of so much of his youth.”
In any other context encouraging, maybe even persuading, a child to hold beliefs which lead not only to the contemplation of suicide, but to obtaining the means, and to going to the intended location, of death, would be regarded with the utmost seriousness. I can think of no reason why the context of a belief in alien abduction should provoke any less concern, or indignation, or intervention by individuals or agencies which have a genuine concern, or a legal responsibility, for the welfare and protection of children. Perhaps it is necessary to establish among the caring professions, a national view as to whether any child, let alone one who has already required the services of a child psychologist should be, as the book repeatedly puts it, “counselled” by those who believe themselves to have been abducted by aliens.
There is much work to be done here, on a case which could either establish the abduction myth in the UK, or provide a route to a much more critical public understanding of how belief groups and cults work, and how people can become convinced of the reality of the unreal. Maybe – if we work really hard – we can move towards understanding the core experiences that underpin the patterns of visions and encounters with the apparently non-human. We need to do far more than tell experients that they’re lying, because they are frequently completely sincere in their belief in what has happened to them – and in their belief that others can have, and will have had, those same experiences. The construction of an irrational and unevidenced cosmology is a frequent consequence of those sincerely-held beliefs.
My view is that the first stage of the investigation of any case is to look for inconsistencies, contradictions, in the evidence as presented. Here, we are fortunate in having two separate accounts of what are supposedly the same events and experiences: the UFO Magazine article from 1996, and the book from 1998. When both versions are allegedly based on Dodd’s own “rigorous” investigation, any credibility the story has will be greatly diminished if no resolution to the inconsistencies is forthcoming. So far, I have written to the publishers to seek their views not only about the apparent contradictions, but more particularly about the specific issues of the organisation for suicide, the decision not to go to the Police when Jason went missing, and the failure to report otherwise unexplained the death and injury of both wild and domestic animals. I’ll pass on any reply I receive, but I would, now, welcome your views on how you think this matter should be taken forward, and with whom. This situation is largely unprecedented on this side of the Atlantic, and it is the right time to try to prevent it arising again.
Yesterday belongs to me
There’s an article in Alien Encounters for April 1998, titled ‘Roswell Explained’, apparently written by a Pole named Zbigniew Blania-Bolnar. The idea is that there was a UFO crash near Laredo on 7.7.1948, characterised as ET, but actually a (Nazi-developed) “kugelblitz”, manned by a monkey. Thus, he argues, Roswell probably had just the same cause.
The source for this material is meant to have been an “American military man of Polish descent called Robert Allan Kolitzky”, who allegedly wrote articles about the event in 1948, but seems to have first provided this report in 1981. It’s worth seeing the piece in AE, but the source material seems typical “. . it’s diameter was estimated to be about 27 meters, and its central part was about 8 metres tall . . It was one of the flying crafts brought over from Germany after WWII, known under the collective name ‘kugelblitz’ (fireball). The eyewitness had access to a military report which states that the post-war American army had at its disposal a considerable number of V2 rockets, several V3 and V4 prototypes, and about 30 kugelblitzes of different kinds”. It’s worth noting that ‘kugelblitz’ is a word used by ‘Renate Vesco’, and that a 27-metre wide flying disc would look nothing like a fireball at all!
‘Blania-Bolnar’ is said to have written a book about “the Laredo Incident” and to have had it published in Poland. The cover is shown, and it is titled “Zdarzenie W Emilcinie”, which apparently means something like ‘incidents/events/happenings at’ “Emilcinie”, which is a place name that appears in a 1991 Polish case. Nothing at all to do with Laredo. I wrote to Editor, Nina Pendred, suggesting this is yet more Nazi disinformation dressed up as investigation, and asking whether AE was given any evidence of BB’s findings, or indeed his existence. She has given me an address for ‘Blania-Bolnar’, so I can ask him myself, and a brief note warning me about libel and slander! Not surprisingly, she makes no mention of having checked the accuracy of the piece prior to publication, and for now, this looks like a distasteful concoction of neo-Nazi propaganda, dependent on yet another mysterious military man, not ‘unnamed’ but strangely unfindable.
More seriously, I’ve been lucky enough to find, through the local library, a copy of the other key work – taking into account the assorted contributions of ‘Renate Vesco’ – in the ‘Nazi UFO’ mythos. This is the almost legendary German Secret Weapons of the Second World War by Rudolf Lusar, translated by R P Heller and M Schindler. The copy I have was published in 1959 by the Philosophical Library, New York, but printed in Great Britain. Lusar gives a little information about himself at the end of his Foreword, originally written for the German edition in April 1957. He says it was written in Munich, and he signs himself as “RUDOLF LUSAR (Major of the Reserve) (ret.) I am not aware that any competent check has been made of Lusar’s background, rank, or of how he obtained – as a mere retired Major – the vast amount of supposedly highly secret material he presents in this book. Some of which seems to originate only with Lusar himself.
Famed US researcher Martin Kottmeyer has been good enough to provide me with some ‘Nazi UFO’ material from a range of sources. One newscutting from the New Britain Herald for Thursday, March 14, 1957 is credited to AP, and is headed
No Flying Saucer Built by Hitler
“Washington (AP) James H Doolittle says it “just ain’t so” that Nazi Germany developed a flying saucer and a bomber that could attack the United States and return without refuelling. The veteran airman, chairman of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, gave a House Appropriations subcommittee his estimate of reports published in Germany of great aviation accomplishments under Hitler. These were contained in a book by Rudolf Lusar, former German War Ministry special weapons chief.
Doolittle’s testimony was published today, along with that of Hugh L Dryden, director of the advisory committee. Dryden said “there is no truth” in a statement that German engineers designed a flying saucer which attained a height of 40,000 feet and speed of 1,250 miles an hour. “This is an advertisement for a book which includes material discovered by our groups who went into Germany after the war”, he said. Dryden said also the man supposed to have designed the bomber that could cross the Atlantic without refuelling had written a book of his own with no mention of any such invention. Doolittle, asked about both the saucer and the bomber, said, “It just ain’t so”.
It would be interesting to know whether Lusar can actually be identified as the former “German War Ministry special weapons chief”, or whether this is an unsubstantiated claim made in the 1957 publicity for the book. The reality of the “Flying Saucers” section of German Secret Weapons of the Second World War is that it runs to just two pages and five lines. More than half a page is taken up by a drawing – devoid of detail – of an aerial and side view of a thin “flying disc” of absurd simplicity, with something like a big balloon gondola stuck through the middle of it. It promises all the aerodynamic potential of a chicken, but Lusar claims that
“during the war German research workers and scientists made the first moves in the direction of these “flying saucers”. They built and tested such near-miraculous contraptions . . . Habermohl and Schriever chose a wide-surface ring which rotated round a fixed, cupola-shaped cockpit. The ring consisted of adjustable wing-discs which could be brought into appropriate position for the take-off or horizontal flight, respectively. Miethe developed a discus-shaped plane of a diameter of 42m. in which adjustable jets were inserted. Schriever and Habermohl, who worked in Prague, took off with the first “flying disc” on February 14, 1945. Within three minutes they climbed to an altitude of 12,400m. and reached a speed of 2,000km./h. in horizontal flight(!) . . . these novel “flying saucers” are far superior to conventional aircraft – including modern turbo-jet machines – that they surpass their flying performance, load capacity and manoeuvrability and thereby make them obsolete.” (pp.166-167)
I don’t know much about weapons or aircraft, but I do know that this clumsy disc apparatus, with something like a large domed summerhouse on top, did not fly at more than 1100 mph, or climb to around 8 miles up in three minutes. How many aircraft ever have? I also know little about cameras, but enough to identify another of Lusar’s claims as pure fabrication
“Among especially important developments of German research were cameras capable of taking up to 8,000,000 photographs per second . . Cranz-Schadin developed an apparatus consisting of a camera with special sparking plugs connected with the electric condenser with twenty-four spark-gaps and twenty-four single-exposure cameras which were geometrically so arranged that one camera belonged to each sparking plug. This camera was able to take up to 5,000,000 pictures per second.”
Let’s just consider these cameras. For 24 cameras, between them, to “take 5,000,000 pictures per second” means that each camera would have to take, er, 208,333 pictures per second. Quite a shutter speed. And an ability to move 5,787 x 36-exposure films past that shutter in just one second. I suppose Cranz-Schardin might just have linked up 24 cameras to shoot in sequence at intervals of one five-millionth of a second, over 24 five-millionths of a second and no longer. But I very much doubt it and, anyway, that just isn’t what ‘Lusar’ claims. He clearly wants us to believe that German cameras could “take 5,000,000 pictures per second”. If ‘Lusar’ was a real person, recording what he believed to be true, then he was, technically, grossly incompetent. His claims for flying saucers and cameras are just two examples to which I can relate. There may be plenty more.
His agenda is made clear at the end of the book, saying that “The achievements of the German people in the Second World War are almost beyond belief . . Confident of justice, trusting in God and Right the German people fought on with superior courage despite great difficulties . . the German sword had to break, since this was the will of Germany’s adversaries”. I can identify no regrets here. Lusar appears to be an unreconstructed Nazi, indulging in the standard disinformation and propaganda that lay at the heart of that regime. He wanted the world of 1957 to think that the still-exciting flying saucer phenomenon was the work of his comrades, a touch of Nazi genius that outlived the war. And he was willing to deceive to achieve that end.
In my view, the confirmation from the 1957 AP release that Lusar mixed real and fabricated information in his book is entirely consistent with the rest of our knowledge of the ‘Nazi UFO’ mythos. The later development of half-baked flying discs bears no comparison to Lusar’s claims. There is no more of a timeline between Lusar’s 1945 flying saucer and real aircraft in the real world than there is evidence that the thing ever existed, let alone flew. I have no doubt that the claims of performance, at least, are lies, concocted by whom, and why, we cannot be sure. But if believed, they make the Germans – the Nazis – look far cleverer than those sick losers have any right to appear.
I have a simple proposition to make. Unless anyone can find a convincing, coherent version of the February 1945 test-flight – not of some half-baked US flying wing a decade later – then I suggest that this “flying saucer” account was a fiction distributed by Lusar, whoever and whatever he may have been, possibly based on the highly dubious account said to have been given by Rudolph Schriever in West Germany in 1952. I also suggest that both were later elaborated by ‘Renate Vesco’ in the late 1960s to include wildly speculative interpretations of the ‘Foo Fighter’ material which, by then, was more widely known, and to place the test-flight in the same month, but in ‘Thuringia’. Since then it has been propagated by one insufficiently careful author after another, particularly in the entertaining, but hardly meticulously researched, work of W A Harbinson.
If this tale is to survive, it’s time for somebody produced a credible, authoritative account that doesn’t quote ludicrous speeds of travel and ascent, that has some clue about the mechanics of the craft’s propulsion, and which, preferably, doesn’t come from a source that claims to have been actively involved with the wartime Nazi regime. Similarly, in the context of the flawed nature of the rest of the evidence, any claim based on the existence of surviving film of wartime ‘Nazi UFO’ test flights would require substantial investigation to be regarded as credible, including an explanation of exactly who presented that material, and how it came to be on show.
It’s important to try to get this right. It’s no good our having some success in controlling the ‘alien abduction’ and ‘secret government’ myths if we just get stuck with a disinformation-based ‘Nazi technology’ one instead. Tim Good’s latest book, the under-researched Alien Base, refers to “‘Flying Saucers of the Third Reich: The Legacy of Prague-Kbely’ (pending publication) by Mark Ian Birdsall”. Another forthcoming book may represent Lusar as authoritative, and further propagate as a revelation a view for which I have yet to detect any proof. That may only highlight my many shortcomings as a researcher, but unless some solid, testable evidence comes along to balance the blatant lies, I think that we have a responsibility to do now what is necessary to dispose of this crude confabulation before it has a chance to achieve a respectability it does not seem to deserve.
This falls firmly under the ‘work in progress’ heading, but some apparent facts have emerged. Firstly, that this case was researched by a responsible and well-informed group before Harry Harris became involved with Alison, and at that stage there was no suggestion of any period of ‘missing time’. Secondly, that there is no objective evidence that the video taken by Alison shows other than a mundane, terrestrial object, which is airborne because it contains a gas that is lighter than air.
Thirdly, and this is where the work needs to be done, the General Medical Council’s guide to the conduct of doctors, ‘Good medical practice’, includes a section headed ‘Abuse of your professional position’. This includes the instruction that
“You must not abuse your patients’ trust. You must not, for example . . . recommend or subject patients to investigation or treatment which you know is not in their best interests”
I suspect that the GP who regressed Alison did so two, maybe three years ago, before the use of hypnotic regression for the recovery of memory was so thoroughly, medically and legally, discredited. Certainly, long before its use was banned by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the highest medical authority in the field in this country, and a ban to which I presume that the GMC would have some regard. But in that Alison seems to believe that she was “taken from her home into a black hole”, and was apparently afraid to continue with the hypnosis, I strongly suspect that the regression was demonstrably not in her ‘best interests’.
So far as the individual GP is concerned, I will seek his assurance that he would not, in view of the information now available about regression hypnosis, seek to use the technique to recover memory again. Then, when I have a couple of weeks to spare, I’ll make a submission to the GMC seeking a view on the involvement of doctors in investigating alien abductions and allegedly related events through the use of regression hypnosis. If I receive anything resembling an authoritative response that might help deal with the problem, I’ll do my best to distribute it to all those who will benefit.
Thanks to Jorge Martin, Puerto Rico has become the centre of the alien world, and the Chupacabras the best-known alien on Earth. Yet Martin’s only claim to authority appears to be that he edits a UFO magazine, and his stories are almost all second or third hand, sometimes undated, and show no evidence of any critical, medical, or serious veterinarian investigation. At times he seems to be doing no more than recounting urban legends, but so far nobody seems to have cared. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a skeptics group in Puerto Rico, so the best we can do at this stage is to look for contradictions in the material he presents.
I’ve been doing some research in order to review Tim Good’s ‘Alien Base’ for Fortean Times. It has proved very interesting partly because, on the grounds of Martin’s material, the only location for an ‘alien base’ really suggested by Good is Puerto Rico.
Hopefully, you’re familiar with the idea that, unprecedented in the whole of human history, unknown to all scientific knowledge, a chap known as Chino met a group of 12″ -14″ tall aliens in Puerto Rico, and killed one of them with a stick. Astonishingly, he can’t recall whether he murdered this sentient, living creature in 1979 or 1980, but does recall all sorts of marginalia about keeping its body in a jar, in a biscuit tin, and under the bath, before it was taken away by men who said, as men do seem to in Martin’s Puerto Rico, that they were taking it to NASA.
Luckily for all of us, a series of polaroid photographs of this funny little concoction of big, rather plastic-looking dented head and hopelessly non-matching scrawny little skeletal body has, it seems, survived. They’ve appeared in small numbers all over the place, but never seem to have been given, together, to any person qualified to examine the image, and decide whether it is likely to be a real creature or just a Nineties equivalent of one of the prepared ‘mermaids’ that even I can remember seeing in sideshows.
Tim Good has chosen to publish one shot of what he describes as the “small creature killed by ‘Chino’”, and the illustration he has used is particularly informative, being one of the few that shows the ‘creature’ full-length, and face on. The total height of the creature is said to be only 12 – 14″. In this picture, the ‘creature’ appears to be positioned with its torso resting on a flat surface, and its legs folded. At a rough estimate, the head and neck appear to account for 30% of the total height, the torso 27%, and the legs 43%. If we take the maximum estimated height of 14″, that would make the head and neck around 4.2″, the torso 3.8″, and the legs 6″. The width of the body at the shoulders would be around 3.5″.
Articles in Flying Saucer Review, Winter 1997, and UFO Magazine, March/April 1998, recount Martin’s latest version of Chino’s alien. As Good has dedicated ‘Alien Base’ to the FSR Editor, and quoted extensively from it, and has worked closely with UFO Magazine in publicising this book and others, I presume that he regards both as trustworthy and dependable sources.
Although the translations differ somewhat, the content of Martin’s latest account of the creature is clear, and is patently designed to prove, by giving evidence of sexual maturity, that it is not a foetus. Stupid theory, anyway. Foetuses don’t have big plastic heads, and their cranial bones are incredibly soft, with the fontanelle in the centre of the skull. They wouldn’t dent in a straight line like Chino’s little victim.
However, in trying to make the tale more credible and definitely not like a foetus, Martin states that, to quote the FSR version translated by Editor Gordon Creighton himself
“it had large and well-developed sex organs – nothing whatsoever like a foetus. Indeed it had a large penis and large testicles as big as those of an adult man. (Sra. Elizabeth Zayas also confirmed all of these details and said she found the size of the little creature’s sex organs quite extraordinary!).”
If we use a relatively conservative estimate of male genitalia being 3″ wide, 4″ in height and perhaps 2″ deep, then on a ‘creature’ with a torso 3.8″ high and 3.5″ wide they would be a completely overwhelming feature. The whole torso, from neck to thigh, would be covered by its genitalia. The ‘creature’ would be grotesque and absurd, and nobody would begin to take it seriously. The illustration in ‘Alien Base’ shows nothing of the sort. Is Good – or anyone else who has used these photos – able to explain this apparent inconsistency? Does he feel that it might reflect on the veracity of Jorge Martin? Is it time we started questioning, much more seriously, all that Martin writes and says?
UFO Magazine Editor an abductee?
I don’t want to be burdening you with too much of the Jason Andrews book, which you should be buying for yourselves, but a snippet at the bottom of page 80, about the reasons for setting up ‘Quest International’, astonished me. It says that
“Quest came into being when Graham Birdsall, who set it up, found himself wondering who to turn to about his own abduction experiences. He soon found that there was a need for an information forum for others in the same boat as himself: intelligent, rational people who had found themselves drawn into something beyond the frontiers of normal life?”
Graham Birdsall’s own abduction experiences? Really?? What do we know about this?
MI5, Tim Rifat, and the alien secret
Somehow, Tim Rifat has managed to persuade not only those who pay for his training courses, but also the publisher Century, that he can actually do ‘remote viewing’. You know, new age astral projection with added paranoia. He apparently has a book coming out in September which may include his claims, produced in the ever-accurate Alien Encounters, that
“American and Russian beam weapons are regularly shooting down alien craft, engaged in a secret war to protect mankind . . My research into abductions indicates that biophysics enables the aliens to wipe abductee’s (sic) memories, paralyse them, and even psychically possess them. One explanation is that a certain alien grouping is using humans for research purposes with the intention of a covert take-over . . In many cases the abductee’s biophysical field is captured or destroyed and replaced with something alien and malign. The extreme measures MI5 have used to try and shut me up, even threatening my life, points to their terror that the public disclosure of remote viewing will allow them to learn the truth about aliens.”
I’m sorry to have to ask, but are we aware that Rifat has ever come up with any convincing evidence that anything he has ‘remote viewed’ has ever existed outside of his own head? And if not, shouldn’t somebody explain that to Century?
Ernie Sears (see AW passim) has a piece in the April SUFOG Newsletter responding to AW6. He dislikes my view that no physical abduction has ever taken place. He summarises the cult-like attitude of abduction believers, saying that “There are the unsolvable differences twixt the ‘experiencers’ and the investigators, and never the twain shall meet until the latter have their own experience!”, but more important is his assertion that he has been able to pierce ‘screen memories’ covering experiences he had up to 60 years ago. A ‘memory’ of seeing fish tanks, each containing a fish, piled high in a ‘fire station’ at Romsey has, after reading Jacobs, become one of “incubariums” where “hybrid” foetuses were nurtured. A childhood memory of a scar on his wrist being caused by “having a knife thrown at me at school, warding it off with my arm” has been deemed mistaken, and is now one of “exactly similar incidents in abductees stories”. In a letter to me he describes the process of correcting his memories, saying that his point of view has been, as he puts it, “‘honed’ many times since the 1930s when UFOs and ‘abductions’ were virtually unknown as such, ‘honed’ being the only description that might fit, as much of the early years all was buried in the subconscious.” To know how abduction memories are created, and then protected and confirmed by a group of believers, this is a particularly useful source.
Professor Freemont and Quest International
I received (see AW7) a prompt and helpful reply from the Professor, which only confirms that in spite of Tony Dodd’s claims of evidence of mutilations, including those connected with Jason Andrews, Quest International has given him no physical evidence at all. The Professor is clearly willing to conduct an examination of any alleged victim of mutilation, but ends his letter “To date I have not received anything other than a splinter of rotting wood from Mr Caton. In particular, I have not received any animal tissue. I should say, that should such tissue become available through proper channels, I would be delighted to examine it.”
A couple of enquiries . . .
1. If anyone out there knows any good reason why the unfavourable comments of a highly respected psychologist – the third doctor to be involved with the case – hitherto unreported beyond a small professional publication in 1983, and about a regression conducted on one of the UK’s most prominent ‘abductees’, should not receive wider publicity, please let me know.
2. There are rumours that Nick Pope regarded himself as having had an alien abduction experience before the publication of his first book. It is certain (see Appendix 3 of ‘Open Skies, Closed Minds’) that members of the public who approached the MOD with a UFO enquiry were given Quest International’s phone number as a contact point, as well as BUFORA’s. It’s unlikely that BUFORA would have investigated cases on the basis of the reality of alien abduction, or have used hypnotic regression. However, particularly in view of what we now know about Tony Dodd’s beliefs, it seems possible that a person approaching the MOD with a rational enquiry could have ended up being assured by Quest of the reality of abduction, and being recommended regression as the best way to explore it. If, when in his post at Air Secretariat 2a, Pope was already as convinced of abduction as he is now, and if anyone emerged from the investigative process as an ‘abductee’, there may be some serious issues for the MOD to consider at a high level. No government employee should, I am sure, be responsible for putting any member of the public in that position. Can anybody clarify the situation, please?