|
by Michael E. Salla, PhD
June 9, 2005
from
Exopolitics Website
The rejection by voters in France and the
Netherlands of the
proposed European Union Constitution on May 29 and June 1, 2005,
respectively, carries much exopolitical significance. The defeat
means that a ’United States of Europe’ as a strategic counterweight
to the United States is unlikely to emerge in the near future.
(see
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/headline/world/3207796).
The result is that the European Union will continue to remain a
common market with great economic integration and a single currency,
but with minimal political cohesion, and even less military
integration. The outcome is that NATO will continue as the
preeminent military institution and Europe, and the United States
will continue to dominate NATO as it has since its formation in
1949. The Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, for example, is an
American and it was this issue of who would occupy the highest
office in NATO that led to France under General de Gaulle removing
itself from the integrated command structure of NATO in 1967 in
protest at continued American dominance. The overall result is that
the U.S. will continue to dominate European military affairs
especially with the integration of former East European states that
are strong allies of the U.S. as witnessed in their strong support
of the Bush administration’s preemptive military action against
Iraq.
The defeat of the idea of a ’United States of Europe’ that could
rival the U.S. and be an independent military/political
counterweight to it under the leadership of France and Germany means
that another way of countering U.S. global dominance will be sought.
French political leaders have clearly recognized, at least with the
Bush administration’s explicit policy of preemptive military action,
that the greatest danger to global peace is unrestrained American
power that prioritizes national interests over global interests.
(see
http://www.iiss.org/showdocument.php?docID=109
).
American dominance
is likely to be accentuated in the development and deployment of
’exotic technologies’ gained through retrieved extraterrestrial
vehicles and information revealed by whistleblowers such as
Col
Phillip Corso in
The Day After Roswell (1997). Another retired US
Army veteran, Sgt Clifford, persuasively reveals in a book based on
official documents gained through FOIA requests (UFO’s are Real,
1997), that U.S. military and diplomatic resources are covertly used
to gather crashed UFOs and extraterrestrial artifacts around the
world in covert programs known as
Project Moondust and Project Blue
Fly.
With the existence of exotic technologies secretly gained through
five decades of covert political/military efforts at retrieving
downed extraterrestrial vehicles, discovery of extraterrestrial
artifacts and agreements with extraterrestrial races, the U.S. is in
a position to increasingly dominate global affairs for decades to
come. In the view of advanced democratic nations such as France, an
unrestrained U.S. superpower that secretly uses its exotic
technology to further its global dominance remains a great threat.
Without an indigenous European political and military counterweight
that is free of American dominance, and has the economic and
technological base to develop its own exotic technologies, it is
likely that French policy makers will increasingly adopt the view
that the most effective restraint on the development, funding and
deployment of exotic technologies that threaten global interests is
an informed American citizenry.
Disclosure of the reality of the UFO phenomenon and truth of the
extraterrestrial hypothesis that many UFOs are piloted by
extraterrestrials from other worlds will do much to bring about
greater transparency in how the U.S. manages and deploys the exotic
technologies it has gained through its reverse engineering efforts.
It can be predicted that with the temporary defeat of a ’United
States of Europe’ free of American dominance, France will
increasingly turn its attention towards more disclosure of
information concerning the truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis.
Consequently, I will now briefly review France’s historic role in
studying UFO sightings and how we might soon see changes in the rate
and extent to which France discloses the truth concerning UFOs and
the extraterrestrial hypothesis.
France and UFO Disclosure
France in 1977 created a department within its equivalent of NASA -
the CNES (Centre National d’Études Spatiales - National Center of
Space Studies) to undertake a civilian study of UFO reports. GEPAN (Groupe
d’Études des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés - Study Group
for Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena) was initially well funded and
represented a serious scientific investigation of the UFO phenomenon
by French scientists. GEPAN was initially headed by Dr. Claude Poher
and later headed by Dr Jean Jacques Velasco in 1983. With the
closure of
Project Blue Book by the US Air Force allegedly due to
inconclusive evidence of UFO’s cited in the 1969
Condon Report, GEPAN represented continued global public interest in the UFO
phenomenon, and the continuing number of UFO sightings that could
not be explained. GEPAN was a model for the kind of rigorous
scientific study of UFOs supported by prominent U.S. researchers
such as Dr Allen Hynek and Dr James MacDonald where a civilian
agency such as NASA would be more likely than the US Air Force to do
a serious study of the UFO phenomenon.
The formation of GEPAN coincided with a United Nations initiative to
promote a more coordinated international research into the UFO
phenomenon. The initial report by Dr Poher to a CNES scientific
committee certainly strengthened the importance of an
internationally coordinated study of UFO’s where he claimed that in,
"60% of the cases reported here, the description of this phenomenon
is apparently one of a flying machine whose origin, modes of lifting
and/or propulsion are totally outside our knowledge"
(see
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1626.htm).
In 1978, the UN General Assembly approved a resolution calling
for a UN department to study UFO sightings around the planet. (see:
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc902.htm).
It is not
coincidental that France’s initiative with GEPAN gave great
legitimacy to efforts to establish a UN collection agency for UFO
reports. While the UN resolution was passed by a committee vote in
1978, it was never implemented due to lack of major power support.
The role of the U.S. in stifling this UN initiative has emerged with
FOIA documents detailing telex communications between the State
Department and the US representative to the UN (see Clifford Stone,
UFO’s are Real). The creation of GEPAN was a significant initiative
since it would presumably be instrumental in collection of a UFO
database not only for France but for most if not all the nearly 30
Francophone countries.
In 1988, GEPAN was renamed SEPRA (Service d’Expertise des Phénomènes
de Rentrées Atmosphériques - Atmospheric Re-entry Phenomena
Expertise Department) and experienced a significant cut back in
funding. The mandate of GEPAN/SEPRA became more general with it now
studying anomalous atmospheric phenomenon in addition to UFO
sightings. The cutback presumably signified a lack of interest in
the UFO phenomenon by the French civilian space agency (CNES) which
thought that the approximately 5% of UFO sightings that could not be
explained didn’t warrant the kind of study and resources previously
given to GEPAN. The case studies investigated by GEPAN arguably
failed to provide the kind of conclusive evidence that would merit
CNES investing further resources to French UFO research.
In 1999, the French
COMETA Report appeared and gave
fresh scientific legitimacy to the study of the UFO phenomenon. Composed by a group of senior scientists and military officials,
the COMETA report emphasized the seriousness of a rigorous
scientific investigation of the UFO phenomenon. It made a number of
recommendations which included: an expansion of funding and
investigations by SEPRA of the UFO phenomenon; establishing a unit
at the highest level of government to deliberate on policy aspects
of the UFO phenomenon; and establish close diplomatic relations with
the U.S. to coordinate a policy response to the UFO phenomenon.
(for
summary of COMETA see
HERE).
While the COMETA report was not distributed widely in the English
speaking world, it proved to be very popular in the Francophone
world and attracted much interest and debate. However, any hope that
SEPRA would witness a restoration of the kind of resources and focus
it previously enjoyed on its inception was sorely disappointed. Not
only did SEPRA fail to have any further resources given to it, but
in January 2004, SEPRA experienced a further cut back in funding so
that it presently continues in name only with its Director being the
sole official responsible for SEPRA.
What might have occurred to have caused the cut back of SEPRA at the
very time that the COMETA report was advising the opposite? Why was
the COMETA report initiated in the first place if its key
recommendations were going to be ignored by the French scientific
and political community? Was SEPRA merely a public relations
exercise as critics earlier contended was the case with the USAF
Project Blue Book?
One explanation is that the virtual elimination of SEPRA as a
functioning department in CNES was done to preempt possible damage
by the publication of a book co-authored by its Director, Dr Velasco
in April 2004 that concluded in favor both of the reality of the UFO
phenomenon and of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. In UFOs... the
Evidence, Velasco was able to draw upon an extensive database of
5800 case studies in the files of SEPRA (13% of which were of
’unknown’ origin), and the book promised to have great impact in
shaping French public opinion on UFO’s.
(see
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1627.htm).
Another explanation to the virtual elimination of SEPRA was
confidence by French policy makers at the highest level that France
had a vital interest in maintaining a rigid non-disclosure policy
concerning UFO reports and the truth behind the extraterrestrial
hypothesis. This was likely a result of policy coordination and
technology sharing with the U.S., Russia and other major states that
made secrecy a price for major states such as France gaining
information and technology gained from extraterrestrial artifacts
retrieved and discovered around the planet. France thus had much to
gain from continued participation in a covert global political
system created to coordinate national policy on UFOs and the truth
of the extraterrestrial hypothesis arguably dated from the World War
II era when Nazi Germany came into possession of extraterrestrial
technologies (see
HERE).
Central to the French policy of non-disclosure was anticipation of a
smooth ratification process of the European Constitution that had
been signed on October 29, 2004 after three years of negotiation.
The Constitution offered the kind of political centralization that
would have enabled France and other major European states to build
up a ’United States of Europe’ that would be sufficiently
independent and powerful to counter the U.S. in the economic and
political spheres, and to achieve an independent military force.
(see
http://www.unizar.es/euroconstitucion/Treaties/Treaty_Const.htm)
Perhaps more importantly, the coming ’United States of Europe’
would give France and other European powers the means by which
American dominance in exotic technologies gained through covert
projects dealing with downed extraterrestrial material would be at
least restrained if not bridged.
The rejection of the European Constitution has put on hold these
ambitions of a politically integrated Europe, and very likely led to
alarm at the highest levels in France that there will not be the
emergence of a strategic counterweight to American dominance in
exotic technologies. As a consequence, the geo-strategic balance of
forces is firmly behind U.S. technological dominance that will
continue to expand as the U.S. has the lion’s share of
extraterrestrial technologies and information retrieved through its
network of global agreements and influence.
Without a politically powerful and independent ’United States of
Europe’ to rival and restrain the U.S. in developing and applying
exotic technologies, it is likely that French policy makers will
decide that it is in France’s national interest to promote public
awareness of the reality of the UFO phenomenon and the
extraterrestrial hypothesis. As the American public becomes aware of
the extraterrestrial hypothesis and the exotic technologies gained
over the last five decades, there will understandably be a public
desire for transparency and accountability in the developing,
funding and application of these exotic technologies. Such an
eventually will be in the national interest of France and other
major nation states since they do not have the means to restrain or
bridge the gap between the exotic technologies possessed by the U.S.
and the technological base of other major states.
Conclusions
The rejection of the European Constitution by French and
Dutch
voters has put indefinitely on hold the French/European dream of an
integrated Europe that has one voice in the political arena, and has
an independent military force. In the absence of a strategic counter
balance to U.S. dominance in the sphere of exotic technologies, it
can be predicted that France will move decidedly forward in
promoting disclosure of the UFO phenomenon and the truth of the
extraterrestrial hypothesis. This is likely to occur in a number of
ways described in the COMETA report.
-
First, reinstating serious
financial support for CEPRA.
-
Second, creating an office at the
highest political level to coordinate national policies on UFOs and
the truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis.
-
Third, diplomatic
relations with the U.S. in public disclosure of the extraterrestrial
hypothesis.
Finally, newer initiatives such as that recently
undertaken by the Brazilian Air Force of opening military files on
UFO reports to civilian researchers (see
http://www.rense.com/general65/braz.htm)
may be adopted and make possible a coordinated public disclosure
campaign that makes the citizenry of France and other major nations
aware of the reality of UFOs and truth of the extraterrestrial
hypothesis.
The unrestrained use of exotic technologies by the U.S. is an
unacknowledged threat to global peace. Major democratic nations such
as France who fail to restrain covert U.S. policies through
political processes such as the creation of a politically integrated
European Union, can be predicted to more vigorously promote public
disclosure of UFO’s and the extraterrestrial hypothesis. This would
acknowledge that an informed US citizenry is best able to restrain
U.S. excesses in the development and deployment of exotic
technologies. The ’No’ vote by French citizens to the proposed
European Constitution is likely to have great exopolitical
significance. It can be anticipated there may not be much delay in
French policy makers making some surprising policy announcements
concerning the reality of UFOs and the extaterrestrial hypothesis.
|