Was It Kilroy, Rather than McElroy, Who Was there at the Desk when Ike's UFO-E.T. Brief Emerged?Recently, a UFOlogical colleague of mine - let's call him Carl - e-mailed me with this plaintive response to the ongoing saga of former New Hampshire state House representative Henry W. McElroy, Jr. (see Items 2.62 and 2.67): "I'd feel better about his credibility if he would sit for a no-holds-barred Q. & A. with the media - or, at the very least, over the web, maybe on CTC [Coast-to-Coast AM's syndicated, late-night radio program] or some such show taking calls. In the world of UFOlogy, little is as it seems."
By Larry Bryant
By Larry Bryant
You'll of course find echoes of Carl's sentiment among some other veteran researchers grown weary (and leery) of UFO history's crying-wolf insiders ranging from the late Bill Cooper to the so-called Project SERPO proponents. At this point, it seems that the only recourse we have is to keep asking questions (and questioning the answers). Fair enough, Mr. McElroy - right?
Accordingly, at McElroy's invitation via his intermediary, I recently e-mailed him a list of six questions. Below, I'm posting his answers, along with my pertinent comments in brackets. I leave it to you as to how to rate his account thus far on, say, a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being the highest level of credibility for such a piece of testimonial evidence; and 10 signifying the least acceptable piece).
LB: (1) What percentage of confidence do you have that the Ike UFO-E.T. "brief" you'd observed while on duty at the New Hampshire state House of Representatives circa 2003 was an official government document?
[Note that, for whatever reason, McElroy foregoes this opportunity to give us a detailed rationale for his certitude.]LB: (2) If a U. S. congressional committee were to hold a series of open hearings on the matter of UFO-E.T. reality, would you be willing to testify, under oath, before that committee?
[Again no explanation offered. Does this absence mean he also would resist a SUBPOENA compelling his delivery of testimony before said committee? How many of the other witnesses to the same document back in the N. H. legislature in 2003-04 also would resist compliance with the subpoena? Are they now putting their heads together to form a bloc of resistance to further exposure of the "brief"?]LB: (3) During your inspection of the "brief," did you notice any security classification stamped/imprinted thereon (e.g., SECRET)? What kind of federal security clearance (if any) did you possess (and why) as a member of the N. H. House's Committee on State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs?
HM: My memory serves me that it was an official Memorandum to President Eisenhower. I do not remember the presence or absence of any security stamps. No federal security clearance required.
[I suppose I should've asked (as some persons now are asking): Why didn't he photocopy the document in question for later analysis/preservation/dissemination? Also: would he now be willing to undergo a polygraph exam as to the veracity of his account? (Such examination remains customary among certain federal agencies charged with monitoring the associations and conduct of their sensitively assigned personnel.)]LB: (4) Would you be willing to be interviewed by such renowned radio-talk show hosts as Jerry Pippin (of http://www.jerrypippin.com ) as to your pre-representative education/employment background and as to your motivation, timing, methodology, and prospects for this smoking-gun disclosure of UFO-E.T. reality? (Please explain your answer.)
HM: No. I have nothing more to say on this topic that can’t be gleaned from viewing of the video, the script, and President Eisenhower’s 1961 Farewell Speech. Insightful studies should also be done of what has gone on before us. This would include, but not [be] limited to, what a host of our own American, earth-based Astronauts have said about the existence of off-world Astronauts. Then, integrate this with what twelve other sovereign countries have released in their extraterrestrial (off-world) Astronaut-related files.
[Another missed opportunity to clarify and solidify the public record here - and to put his account into palatable perspective from the point of view of its human-interest value.]LB: (5) If you could redo any aspect of your pivotal disclosure effort, what would that be - and why ?
HM: No “redo” required.
[Perhaps he needs more time to ponder this question.]LB: (6) What suggestions do you have as to how certain UFO-E.T. researchers worldwide can help determine the document's whereabouts and investigate its authenticity/provenience?
HM: I do not want to be so presumptive as to suggest that such a distinguished body of researchers on this topic do anything. One last point is that we are speaking of the fact that “Truth Will Come Out.” This reminds me of the following quote which I remember from a story which went something like this: The noises around us make it hard to hear. But the human voice is different from other sounds. It can be heard over noises that bury everything else. Even if it’s just a whisper . . . when it’s telling the truth.
[By this critique, I mean not to disparage Mr. McElroy's integrity, record of public service, or passion for UFO-E.T. truth. With his testimony, we stand at a crossroads, wondering which way to turn in what seems to be an eternal, thankless quest in the public interest. Thank, YOU, sir, for trying to plant a beacon for us.]More . . .
Official Brief to President Eisenhower : " . . . It Informed President Eisenhower of The Continued Presence of Extraterrestrial Beings Here in USA"
Transcipt of Witness Declarations From NPC UFO Conference Held in Washington D.C.
SHARE YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE
HELP SUPPORT THIS SITE