The Ufo Silencers: Mystery of the Men in Black

by Timothy Green Beckley

  During the early evening of June 15, Smyth's phone rang and a "cultured voice," as he described it, advised him to stop all saucer research and to discontinue any connections with Barker, Moseley, Beckley, Keel and myself. Further, he should not

  attend the forthcoming Congress of Scientific Ufologists (later National UFO Conference) in Cleveland. If he did not comply with the requests, he would deeply regret it, the voice warned.

  Since Smyth does not know Beckley, nor exchange information with him, and since he did not plan to attend the Congress, his caller was evidently partially misinformed.

  On the 18th Smyth called to tell me had had been unable to go to work that day, due to a particularly upsetting occurrence. Early in the morning, as he was preparing to leave and catch his bus, his dog had begun howling like a wolf while it looked out the window. Smyth went to the window and looked out. On the other side of the street was a large black car, with one man in the driver's seat, and two people in the rear, both of which were attending some kind of electronic equipment. One of the men apparently wore earphones, while the other raised a contraption which he described as "a crystalline wheel," with a two to three foot rod extending from it. The wheel began to glow with a yellow light; then the light suddenly concentrated into a yellow beam, which shot out, striking Smyth in the forehead, as he felt a blast of heat. Before he blacked out, he was able to note the license plate on the car. It resembled a U.S. Government plate, and bore the identification, "U 1436." The car quickly left after the ray struck Smyth. When he recovered consciousness, he was suffering a splitting headache. The headache persisted throughout the day and two more "blackouts" occurred.

  They Have Been in Cleveland, Ohio

  During the Cleveland Congress, a rather odd incident occurred in the luncheon room of the Wild Boar Inn, a part of the Sheraton Airport Motor Inn, where most of the attending delegates were lodged. On the afternoon preceding the Open Session, a group of delegates met to have lunch prior to departure for the Valley Forge High School auditorium where the public lectures would take place.

  The tables, each seating four, were occupied by the elite of the Congress, such as Captain Robert Loftin, Moseley, Beckley, Ralph Fanning, Gene Duplantier, and Allen H. Greenfield. Mary and I, along with Barker and Roseanne Maruca (a bibliographer, interested in Ufology, who has just completed cataloging the huge UFO publication collection of Moseley—and is trying to track down the many items which recently have disappeared).

  Mary suddenly glanced toward a table, directly behind me, and near the door of the Inn. In a voice, which suddenly had been raised, and which startled all of us, she exclaimed, "Concentrate, everybody, we are being watched. Quiet everybody! We are under surveillance!"

  Barker looked up from his late breakfast to determine what was causing Mary's concern. He said nothing, but just stared past me. As quickly as propriety allowed, I managed to turn my chair and my head to look in that direction. I saw the backs of two male figures, leaving the room in a most precipitate manner.

  Mary, who had observed the men for some minutes before speaking out, and then, in her fright, had cried out rather loudly, told us that a very pale, blue-eyed man, with silver-colored hair, had been staring at Barker from an uncluttered table near the entrance of the room. He had been dressed in a black turtle-necked sweater, and had been accompanied by another man, in a black suit, and who wore large sunglasses. The latter had not been looking at our group; but when Mary made her exclamation, he appeared to be startled, quickly arose, and beckoned for the silver-haired man to follow him.

  And that is just about all of it. Barker did call me, immediately after he had returned home from the Congress, noting that he had been unable to evade the constant "tailing" of a car driven by a dark-clothed priest, which followed him most of the way home from Cleveland.

  'Doppelganger is a German word describing the exact double of an individual. It is not so much associated with the etheric or astral body as it is a kind of physical double. Although this phenomenon is said to occur rarely, it is firmly implanted in occult tradition. I personally feel this case involved an impersonator, carefully made up to resemble Jim, with the rather glaring mistake of wearing a topcoat in summer.

  Much evidence points to Moseley having a double, or that a person of the New York area looks very much like him. When I appeared with him on the Long John Nebel "Versus" show early in the spring of that year, John chided Jim for not speaking to him when he encountered him in a passing taxi cab. He told Jim he had rolled down the window and spoken to him, and that he (Jim) had looked him directly in the eye, but had apparently not recognized him at all. Jim had been on various Long John radio shows many, many times, and surely would recognize John. Jim told John he had no memory of the encounter, and apologized for not speaking—though he could not possibly imagine how he could fail to recognize the famous radio personality.

  'Smyth's dog behaved similarly to "Bandit," the dog belonging to Newell Partridge, of West Virginia, who complained the animal might have been kidnapped by "Mothman," in November, 1966. He said the dog "howled like a wolf' prior to his seeing two glowing eyes near his barn. Men in black were also connected with the Mothman sightings. Readers may also remember that Albert K. Bender, who first publicized the three men, suffered painful headaches (see Flying Saucers and the Three Men, published by Paperback Library, Inc.).

  The Problem of Unidentified Flying Objects

  There has been a new theory advanced to explain—and not explain away—the more mysterious elements and behavior patterns of the flying saucers. Much of the speculation on this theory came from Allen Greenfield, of Atlanta, Georgia, one of the principal proponents of the "Alternate Reality" theory. When first advanced in the 1960s, the theory caused a spark of speculation among many saucer researchers as to the actual origin of many of the objects reportedly observed.

  Although now retired from UFO research, Greenfield met with us in the days of his heavy UFO involvement. On one such occasion, we sat him down to sound him out on his theory.

  Our first question was an expected one: "What actually is the Alternate Reality Theory?"

  "Maybe it's just another theory, like so many others: hoaxes; psychological solutions; natural phenomena; spaceships, 4-D or whatever. But I think we just may have hit upon something of significance—as I suspect my colleagues in this theory will agree." Mr. Greenfield went on to explain that if his theory turns out to be valid, we are dealing with "awesome implications which are really tremendous. It will alter our entire concept of human history. Indeed, it may well alter our very way of living."

  Greenfield continued by making the following six points:

  1. The UFO phenomena and other "border" phenomena seem to be, at least in some cases, linked.

  2. Many of the accounts of contact or near-contact seem to be

  true to the extent that they are reasonably accurate subjective accounts of actual experiences of one kind or another. However, there are indications that these experiences, while accurate so far as the witness is concerned, and while having objective external stimuli, are viewed within the context of the observer's own background experience. Also, there is the distinct possibility that some amount of willful deception may be involved on the part of the UFOnauts.

  3. The concept of "they walk among us" is not only not "farfetched," but is probably quite true. This may serve to explain a number of baffling cases that have shown up over the years.

  4. We seem to be dealing with groups of entities with more than one purpose. In other words, some saucers may well be hostile, some unconcerned, some friendly in one sense or another.

  5. The work of such persons as Tom Cornelia (Peter Kor), the late Ray Palmer, Steve Erdmann, Jerome Clark, Paul Thomas and others are particularly important to understanding this theory.

  6. Other works, outside the direct usual UFO sphere, are also relevant.

  Greenfield then pointed out that the Fall, 1966 issue of Saucer News, edited by James W. Moseley,
had an article which should be of interest to anyone engaged in "AR" studies. The article, "Perspective: Flying Saucers—Physical or Psychic." is by Peter Kor. In this article, Kor poses three possible frameworks of explanation for the saucer phenomena: 1. Psychic; 2. Conventionally Physical; 3. Substratic (intangible).

  "Each of these frameworks has unique consequences," Kor points out, "which can be tested by fundamental trends in the saucer evidence. Which one do you think best fits the history and facts of the flying saucer saga?"

  While the degree of Greenfield's agreement with Kor's alternatives is "tenuous" (in his own words), he did find much of what Kor had to say of interest. "Here we apparently have a new term introduced to the field: substratic. Let's not make a mistake, 'substratic' is not the same as 'alternate realities.' It seems to mean a UFO phenomenon that is inherently tangible. It would be interesting to hear how, within this framework, Mr. Kor accounts for cases of physical evidence."

  At about the time interest in Greenfield's comments on the AR theory had attracted a number of "inner circle" researchers in the New York area, who had gathered mainly for the purpose of discussing plans for the 1967 Congress of Scientific Ufologists. Mr. Greenfield continued by stating that "Another article can be gleaned from the July- August, 1966 issue of the outstanding British journal, Flying Saucer Review. The article by Jerome Clark, 'The Strange Case of the 1897 Airship' poses a very basic question about the nature of UFO and contact accounts: Are they accurate to the extent that the witnesses are reporting what they have seen within the witnesses' own ecological framework? If the answer is affirmative, the implications are quite vast.

  The following series of informal questions concern, generally, the "AR" theory, and were asked of Mr. Greenfield over the course of many deep conversations on the subject.

  In relation to the so-called "interplanetary" theory of saucers, what does the AR theory have to offer:

  "As you know there are inconsistencies in the interplanetary theory, that is, in relation to the evidence. The AR theory does not rule out the possibility of interplanetary visitations, but rather says that this may be only a part of the explanation for the phenomena observed. Pure physical phenomena might explain some of the evidence submitted, but there is a large body of evidence that it does not explain. Similarly, a wholly non-physical phenomenon would not explain all the evidence. The AR theory seeks to coordinate all the evidence into a single coherent pattern."

  How then, Mr. Greenfield, does the AR theory account for saucers, per set

  "At this point, a theory does not offer a definite reason for UFOs. There does not seem to be the idea that they are vehicles of a sort, though their exact nature and reason for existence is unsure. There is also the matter of the sub-theory of seeing the phenomenon as a manifestation of the viewer's own background experience, that is as subjective viewing of an objective stimulus, the exact nature of which is currently unknown."

  Does the AR theory account for mysterious disappearances?

  "Yes, if one accepts the idea that reality is not fixed (at least not fixed in our present understanding of reality), it is not difficult to understand how persons or objects might be caught in some sort of reality warp and enter or leave a given state of reality. This would serve to explain many legends and Fortean phenomena as well."

  In relation to the above answer we pointed out to Mr. Greenfield that many sightings are made by more than one person, each of at least a slightly different background, yet their descriptions normally coincide to a large extent. His reply was well thought out.

  "Firstly, persons coming from the same general ecological framework would probably see a given UFO in generally the same way. Secondly, there are cases where persons of totally different backgrounds sight unidentified aerial phenomena (example: the Rev. Gill incident). Further study of these special cases would be needed before a full evaluation of this consideration may be given."

  Just what then are the mechanics of inter-reality travel?

  "At this point we can see several trends in the evidence. First, if UFOs are indeed in some way manifestations of vehicular activity, then it would follow that some form of vehicular inter-reality transmission is possible. Secondly, we have the above mentioned matter of 'reality warps.' Thirdly, there are the indications of fixed transfer points, such as the Holes at the Poles Ray Palmer often mentioned."

  Another question which came to our mind was: "Why do some UFOs appear hostile, and others not?"

  "In our opinion, some UFOs appear to be hostile, some do not, and others appear to be indifferent. Using 'reasoned speculation,' one may assume from this that we are dealing with at least three different groups of entities. This seems consistent with the Shaverian concept of dero, tero and 'elder races.' It is also consistent with our own experience in that there do seem to be three possible basic points of view on a given question: pro; anti; and neutral."

  We then asked Allen Greenfield how he might approach the various contact cases in light of his theory.

  "The alternate reality can shed a whole new light on cases of alleged contact with alien entities. The idea that contactees have been honestly reporting things as they see them is not new. Dr. Leon Davidson some years ago posed this idea in relation to Adamski's case, but attributed the deception to the government. The flaw in this is the widespread nature of these cases, and the lack of real motivation.

  "However, the AR theory can provide a much more plausible rational explanation. For example, if we accept the ecological premise, we can easily see how a contactee, having a legitimate experience, will hear from the space people what he wants to hear. We can also see why persons from more sophisticated backgrounds might have less sophisticated experiences.

  "The problem of deliberate deception can be dealt with in either of the following ways: An individual chances upon a landed UFO. The entities aboard are not welcoming company, so they tell the unfortunate passerby some cock-and-bull story and send the poor devil on his way.

  "The other instance would be the planting of deliberately contradictory stories with various contactees in order to keep a state of confusion about their nature in effect. Either of these instances are plausible.

  "The 'Men in Black' type cases might have connections in the same vein. Here there might also be an authentic element of knowing too much about flying saucers,' although at least in the famed Bender case, it hardly seems possible that Bender knew all that much. In fact from his magazine of the period, one would be inclined to say that Bender seemed to know very little about UFOs."

  UFO Witness Abducted By Agents of Terror—The Men in Black Strike Once More

  We will not reveal to you in what Eastern city Patricia Hyde currently resides. The cracking in her voice as she tells her tale of personal terror is sufficient reason for us to believe that the last few years have been a living hell for this young woman. For Patricia is the first to admit that it took her quite a long time before she was able to go about her everyday business without looking over her shoulder at every little sound, paranoid that someone—or something—was keeping tabs on her movements.

  Before July 1972, Pat Hyde hadn't thought much about UFOs. Sure she had read articles in the popular press; however, still in her early twenties, she had more pressing matters on her mind. But on the humid summer evening when it all began, Pat was to have her consciousness altered and at the same time leave herself open for harassment by the sinister Men in Black, whose sole purpose seems to be to "silence for good" those individuals who have had close encounters with other-worldly intelligence and are not bashful about keeping their experience a secret.

  It was around 9:00 P.M. and Pat was in the front seat of her car attending an outdoor movie with her mother in Arcadia, Florida when something unusual in the twilight attracted her curiosity.

  "It started off looking kind of like an ordinary star in the evening sky," Pat began her fascinating narrative. "But as I watched it move across the heavens from north to south over the giant movie sc
reen, I began to realize that the object could not be attributed to any astronomical phenomena, as the bright yellowish light was tumbling toward the earth in a falling leaf motion.

  "When the object got directly over the car I couldn't see it any more so I got out of the parked automobile and strained my neck looking upward, interested in knowing if it was still visible to the naked eye. At this point, I saw a white light—a ray—shooting out from beneath the object. The best I can describe it is to say it closely resembled a searchlight beacon in that it scanned the ground near where I stood before eventually landing directly upon me."

  Pat was understandably frightened as the eerie beam was cast down onto her body. Looking up directly into the blinding light the witness was almost positive that she could make out the bat-like shape of a huge craft hidden behind the brilliant glow that made it difficult for her to see.

  "The light stayed on me for only three or four seconds, I would estimate. Then it continued to move along the ground as if it was searching for something." Pat says the only sensation she got from being enveloped in the light was a feeling of "warmth." For the duration of her experience, Pat's mother was trying to make her get back into the car. "She was almost hysterical, near tears. People in the other cars were caught up in the emotion. Someone yelled, 'Is it a helicopter?' —I knew it wasn't and my curiosity got the better of me. I just wanted to watch it, so in awe was I of this object."

  Suddenly the beacon of light flickered out and the object itself got dimmer and dimmer. "The yellow glow faded and then went straight up into the air out of view in a matter of a second or two."

  Pat says she got back into the car, but never got to finish seeing the movie as her mother was too upset and wanted to be taken home. And while Pats mind whirled with the realization that she had been subjected to a very important experience, her mother refused to discuss their sighting, saying that it continued to frighten her. "My Mom even had nightmares about this for a long time afterwards. She would dream