Exopolitics: political implications of the extra-terrestrial presence
DVD of the Extraterrestrial Civilisations and World Peace Conference.
DVD Cover
Also recommended
Book Cover
Book information.

Exopolitical Comment # 39

Philip Corso and Paul Hellyer: Initiating Public Debate Over the Weaponization of Space & targetting of Extaterrestrial Vehicles

Colonel Philip Corso has recently become a renewed focus of interest in the UFO community due to him being cited by a former Canadian Minister of Defense, Paul Hellyer, as a reliable source of UFO information. According to Hellyer, a retired US Air Force general confirmed Corso's claims about extraterrestrial technologies described in his book The Day After Roswell. Along with confirmation from other confidential 'official' sources, Hellyer had the confidence to come forward to declare the existence of a high level government conspiracy to hide the truth about the UFO phenomenon and the extraterrestrial presence (see http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-38.htm ). Given his former cabinet level position in one of the Group of Eight nations, Hellyer's claims of such a cover up are nothing short of breath taking. His public emergence at a symposium titled "Exopolitics Toronto" represents a powerful fissure in the so far monolithic silence by public officials over the preponderance of evidence supporting a "Cosmic Watergate".

In his speech, Hellyer discussed the profound policy implications of developing space weapons to target extraterrestrial visitors. Hellyer was opposed to what he perceived to be a U.S. military policy of depicting extraterrestrials as "the enemy", promoting the weaponization of space, and using advanced 'particle beam' technologies to target extraterrestrial vehicles. He cited the lack of rigorous public debate over the merits of such a national security policy as a major objection to it being covertly put in place. Hellyer's approach, however, contrasts with Philip Corso's own stated position on the merit of weaponizing space to deal with what Corso believed to be a genuine 'national security threat' posed by extraterrestrials. This article will explore the reasons why Corso supported such a view of extraterrestrials as the enemy; whether extraterrestrials do genuinely pose a national security threat to the U.S. or other countries; and the best response to Hellyer's profound policy question concerning the weaponization of space and targeting of extraterrestrials.

In his book, The Day After Roswell, co-authored with William Birnes, Corso declared that extraterrestrials were abducting civilians, violating U.S. airspace, and destroying aircraft sent to intercept them. He viewed the extraterrestrials as a direct threat to U.S national security and declared: "For over fifty years, now, the war against UFOs has continued as we tried to defend ourselves against their intrusions" (The Day After Roswell, p. 290). Elsewhere in The Day After Roswell, Corso describes the national security threat posed by UFOs and the need for a military weaponization program to target and shoot down UFOs conducting such violations. He specifically championed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) as the appropriate response to extraterrestrial intrusions, and that the US and USSR both knew what SDI's true purpose was:

We [US & USSR] both knew who the real targets of SDI were… It was the UFOs, alien spacecraft thinking themselves invulnerable and invisible as they soared around the edges of our atmosphere, swooping down at will to destroy our communications with EMP bursts, buzz our spacecraft, colonize our lunar surface, mutilate cattle in their own horrendous biological experiments, and even abduct human beings for their medical tests and hybridization of the species. And what was worse we had to let them do it because we had no weapons to defend ourselves (The Day After Roswell, p. 292).

A number of UFO researchers have claimed that these anti-extraterrestrial statements were introduced by Corso's co-author William Birnes, and that Corso was not as anti-extraterrestrial as The Day After Roswell suggests. Unfortunately, that is not accurate as a reading of Col Corso's original notes make clear. These were published in Italian as L'Alba Di Una Nuova Era (Dawn of a New Age, 2003) and contain many similar statements revealing the depth of Corso's animosity towards visiting extraterrestrials. For example, in terms of violating U.S. air space, Corso wrote: "They have violated our air space with impunity and even landed on our territory. Whether intentional or not, they have performed hostile acts. Our citizens have been abducted and killed" (Dawn of a New Age, p. 77). Significantly, Corso goes on to make the following startling claim about the extraterrestrial visitors: "The above are acts of war which we would not tolerate from any worldly source. It also appears they do not tolerate any such acts on our parts on their bases." (Dawn of a New Age, p. 77). Corso in The Day After Roswell described extraterrestrial bases on the moon, the implication here is that the extraterrestrials also have bases on the Earth, and the U.S. government was powerless to monitor these bases.

Corso went on to fully describe the nature of the interaction between extraterrestrial visitors and the general population:

... the aliens have shown a callous indifference concerning their victims. Their behavior has been insidious and it appears they might be using our earth and manipulating earth life. Skeptics will excuse them that possibly they are benevolent and want to help, however, there is no evidence they have healed anyone or alleviated human ailments. On the other hand, they have caused pain, suffering and even death (Dawn of a New Age, p. 98).

In terms of cooperation between the US and Russia (former USSR) to deal with the extraterrestrials, Corso wrote: "The U.S. and USSR are aligning their space programs against a common enemy." [Dawn of a New Age, 78]

Consequently, it can be concluded that there is no ambiguity in Corso's belief that extraterrestrials are a genuine threat to US. national security and the weaponization of space was an urgent policy priority to deal with the "extraterrestrial enemy". If alive today, Corso would no doubt be a strong supporter of the current U.S Air Force plans to weaponize space and build a global defense shield that could target extraterrestrial visitors (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0518-02.htm ). In short, Corso has consistently demonstrated strong support for military solutions to the presence of visiting extraterrestrials that in his view were performing abductions and other 'intrusive activities' that posed a direct threat to U.S. national security.

The question that can now be raised is whether extraterrestrials do genuinely pose a national security threat to the U.S. or the earth more generally. This question is made very complex by the amount of conflicting data on the extraterrestrial presence from a variety of whistleblower and witness sources whose testimony is more difficult to verify when compared to the case of Corso. Answering such a policy question first requires that one understand the nature of the "national security threat" posed by extraterrestrials. Second, one needs to identify any groups of extraterrestrials that may be performing intrusive actions that fall into the category of 'threat'. Finally, one has to identify extraterrestrials performing non-intrusive activities that do not appear to be a threat to the national security of the U.S. or other countries.

There is considerable evidence that the U.S. has entered into a series of technology exchange agreements with a limited number of extraterrestrial races, and we need to understand the nature of these agreements to identify the possible threat posed by extraterrestrials (see http://www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper-4.htm ). A number of alleged whistleblowers such as Charles Hall, Michael Wolf, Daniel Burisch, Clifford Stone, Phil Schneider, William Cooper, etc., describe the various agreements reached with extraterrestrials that they saw direct evidence of during their participation in projects or assignments with the highest possible security classifications. Furthermore, there is considerable circumstantial and testimonial evidence pointing to President Eisenhower being actively involved in meeting with and reaching agreements with extraterrestrial races (see http://www.exopolitics.org/Study-Paper-8.htm ). Col Corso himself alludes to such agreements reached by the Eisenhower administration in various passages in the Day After Roswell. For example, he wrote: "We had negotiated a kind of surrender with them [extraterrestrials] as long as we couldn't fight them. They dictated the terms because they knew what we most feared was disclosure." (p. 292).

Extraterrestrials that have entered into these agreements have performed activities in the form of abductions, genetic experiments and aerial surveillance that lead to great suspicion as to their ultimate agenda. Corso repeatedly pointed out that such intrusive actions amounted to an act of war and justified a concerted military response by U.S. authorities. It needs to be pointed out that prior to these alleged agreements, most human-extraterrestrial interactions appeared to be of the benevolent 'space brother' category that emerged in the 1950's. 'Contactees' such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry and others claimed to have been exposed to a variety of positive extraterrestrial experiences that inspired a rapid growth in public interest in the benevolent 'space brothers' (see http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/et031.html ). There is reason to believe that the abduction phenomenon that began with the 1961 Betty and Barney Hill case was a direct result of alleged agreements reached with extraterrestrials. That is not to say that abductions didn't happen before the agreements, but that the agreements enabled the abductions to increase at a rate which went far beyond whatever the government authorities responsible for these originally intended.

The government authority responsible for such agreements owes its origins to the Majestic-12 control group created by President Truman on September 24, 1947 to deal with the UFO phenomenon. Due to its clandestine nature and unaccountable status, this government entity responsible for UFO affairs is often referred to as the 'secret government'. President Clinton when asked by famed Washington Post correspondent Sarah McClendon why he didn't do more to have the truth about UFOs disclosed, he allegedly confided: "Sarah, there's a secret government within the government, and I don't control it" (http://www.presidentialufo.com/newpage17.htm ). The 'secret government' is the government within the government that controls and makes policy decisions over how to deal with extraterrestrials; whether they constitute a 'threat' or not; and develops agreements with some extraterrestrial races.

There is intense debate over whether extraterrestrials involved in abductions (typically described as 'Grays' from Zeta Reticulum) have a covert 'take-over' agenda. Researchers such as Dr David Jacobs (author of The Threat) believe the 'Grays' have a covert plan to take-over human society by engineering a superior hybrid race. On the other hand, researchers such as Dr John Mack (author of Passport to the Cosmos) believes the star visitors have a 'transformative' agenda designed to blend together the best characteristics of extraterrestrials and humanity. While this is an important debate, it glosses over one of the key features of the extraterrestrial presence - the classified agreements reached with the 'secret government'. Without taking sides in the 'transformative' vs. 'take-over' debate, I believe it vital to consider all the data and come up with a nuanced response that takes into account different extraterrestrial races performing activities. I have argued elsewhere that extraterrestrials can be distinguished on the basis of them either being inside or outside the secret network of agreements reached with secret government authorities (see: http://www.exopolitics.org/Report-ET-Motivations.htm ).

The key policy issue is not whether we should establish communication with extraterrestrials to resolve differences that lead to confrontations over the number of abductions or other intrusive activities reported by Corso and others; but the precise nature of the agreements reached with extraterrestrials, and how these are conducted in covert and unaccountable manner. As far as the abduction phenomenon is concerned, it is very likely that these were made possible by, or accelerated as a result of, secret agreements by secret government authorities with one or more extraterrestrial races.

The national security threat posed by extraterrestrials is a covert one that exists through the classified agreements established by the secret government with some extraterrestrial races. The motivation of extraterrestrials that have entered into these agreements is very questionable and gives considerable cause for suspicion as to their overall intent. Certainly the great number of abductions that have occurred give rise to the 'take over' scenario promoted by Jacobs and other researchers. Once one considers the vast secret infrastructure created to develop extraterrestrial technologies and the illicit funding required for such an infrastructure (see http://www.exopolitics.org/Report-Black-Budget.htm ), it is clear that the national security threat posed by extraterrestrials is INTERNAL rather than EXTERNAL. Corso's depiction of extraterrestrials as an external military threat to the U.S. is therefore not accurate.

Extraterrestrials that have entered into agreements with secret government authorities are complicit in the creation of national security system based on secrecy, unaccountability and illicit funding. This directly threatens US. national security both in terms of a covert take-over by extraterrestrials, and an erosion of the constitutional principles upon which the U.S. is based. The real national security threat posed by some extraterrestrial visitors is a result of the desire of the 'secret government' to acquire and develop extraterrestrial technologies at any cost, even if it means giving permission to a limited number of abductions.

On the other hand, extraterrestrials who have not entered into such technology exchange agreements with secret government authorities have behaved in ways that display great consideration and benevolence towards humanity. This is evidenced in the extensive number of contactee or 'space brother' reports from the 1950's, right up to the modern era with alleged contactees such as Billy Meier, Sixto Paz Wells, Carlos Diaz, etc. These extraterrestrials reflect great respect for human free will and follow what appears to be a clear directive for non-interference. Extraterrestrials that are trying to assist humanity, as described by these alleged contactees, are secretly being targeted by space weapons in order to capture their technology or the EBEs themselves. This also includes some of the Grays from Zeta Reticulum involved in abductions that are included among the extraterrestrial races secretly targeted as whistleblowers such as Clifford Stone point out (see http://www.exopoliticsinstitute.org/Journal-vol-1-1-Stone-pt-1.pdf ). It does appear that the relationship between the Grays and the 'secret government' is a complex one where some whistleblowers report on military confrontations between them in terms of the extent to which either or both have violated the terms of their secret agreements.

In terms of the weaponization of space and SDI, the deliberate targeting of extraterrestrial visitors who are attempting to establish communications and contact with an extensive number of civilians needs to be rigorously debated. This requires putting to a stop the current U.S. policy of targeting extraterrestrial vehicles. As Hellyer pointed out in his September speech: "Are they really enemies or merely legitimate explorers from afar?" (http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-38.htm ). What makes this policy issue complex from the perspective of whistleblowers such as Corso, who is representative of many military officials briefed about the extraterrestrial presence, is that they believe that such a militaristic policy is appropriate. This policy is justified, in Corso's and other military officials' views, on the basis of the extensive abductions that are happening, and other extraterrestrial intrusions that are occurring.

The abduction phenomenon needs to be understood in terms of the classified agreements reached between the 'secret government' and extraterrestrials, and their respective hidden agendas. I consider it very plausible that there are various factions, both human and non-human, that want to create as much misunderstanding and conflict as possible between the U.S. military and different extraterrestrial races. It should be pointed out that military officials such as Corso did not appear to be briefed about friendly extraterrestrials and the latter's non-intrusive activities. Instead, Corso was given information on abduction related activities and other extraterrestrial intrusions that create the psychological framework for the creation of 'enemy images' (or 'enmification') as pointed out by Sam Keen in his important book Faces of the Enemy (see: http://www.classroomtools.com/faces.htm ). In short, what we have been seeing over the last 50 years or so is an 'enmification process' whereby an extraterrestrial enemy can be constructed that justifies the creation of SDI and the weaponization of space. This takes us to the warnings of Dr Carol Rosin and Dr Steven Greer about a contrived extraterrestrial threat being the basis of a public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence (see: http://www.illuminati-news.com/ufos-and-aliens/html/carol_rosin.htm ) .

Consequently, in response to the profound policy question raised by Hellyer of whether weaponization of space and the development of SDI is an appropriate policy response to the extraterrestrial presence, the answer is NO. There is no need for a military response to the extraterrestrial presence since it is clear that extraterrestrials who pose a credible 'national security threat' do so by virtue of their involvement in a series of secret agreements that make possible a covert take over of the vast infrastructure of extraterrestrial related projects that exist in the U.S., and other countries. This covert extraterrestrial threat requires a POLITICAL solution rather than a MILITARY solution - public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence.

With public disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence, there can be the necessary transparency and accountability to ensure that any technology exchange agreements with extraterrestrials are conducted in a responsible way, and do not make human society prone to a covert 'take-over' by extraterrestrials that operate in a clandestine manner. It is very likely that the abduction phenomenon would cease to be a problem once transparency and accountability were brought into play. Extraterrestrial visitors performing such activities could be closely monitored and persuaded from continuing any activities that violated individual human rights. 'Persuasive mechanisms' would come in a variety of ways: rigorous public debate over extraterrestrial races; educating extraterrestrials about human rights standards; and the anticipated support of many extraterrestrial races in monitoring and countering violations by other extraterrestrial races.

The Honorable Paul Hellyer called for an urgent public debate over the appropriateness of current military policies directed towards extraterrestrial visitors. The current policy advocated by Philip Corso of weaponizing space through SDI and targeting extraterrestrial vehicles, is supported by many former and current military officials 'in the loop' about the extraterrestrial presence. The development and use of space based military weapons against extraterrestrial visitors will be shown to be a poor policy choice once the true history of 'secret government' and extraterrestrial agreements are revealed. As a former Minister of Defense, Paul Hellyer is very familiar with the importance of policy questions concerning the use of military weapons in resolving international political problems. He is to be congratulated on bringing to the public's attention the "profoundly important policy questions that must be addressed" with regard to the weaponization of space and the alleged targeting of extraterrestrial visitors.

© Michael E. Salla, PhD
Nov 15, 2005

Note: The Hon Paul Hellyer has been invited to attend the forthcoming "Extraterrestrial Civilizations and World Peace Conference from June 9-11, 2006, on the Big Island of Hawaii. For more information and the list of confirmed speakers that include Ambassador John McDonald, Brig General Stephen Lovekin; and Dr Michael Salla; please visit: www.etworldpeace.com

Forward as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications. Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.
home - about - papers - initiatives - courses - events - shop - media - founder - support - recommended reading - links
copyright © 2003 - 2007 Dr Michael Salla · web design by lamiroy consulting