Although I am hesitant to write about this information without having vetted the supplied documentation, there are enough clues presented to force a re-examination of officially released US government documents and statements.
Included among the documents (presumably supplied to Graham under a FOIA request) is a copy of his file from a Department of Defense / Defense Investigative Service (DIS) investigation, file number 89311-DK1-3408-1W9, concerning his activities while employed as an electronic test tech by AeroJet.
[DIS is now the Defense Security Service]
I have been rather outspoken (and often criticized, especially by the folks at Reality Uncovered) about the risk of non-classified information, and government concerns.
Graham's DIS file is an excellent example of this kind of security risk:
Following his employer's statement that Graham is an "honest, responsible person," it is noted that "Graham does have a problem in requesting information for which he had no 'need-to-know'... "
The report also states that his employer was concerned that "unclassified data being combined with other unclassified data yielding classified data," and that "Graham could be used by others (UFO buffs) to collect data..."
He then added that he felt that "Graham was susceptible to being tricked into providing research or data" in spite of his opinion that Graham was "basically loyal."
The bottom line?
Graham is "irresponsible in risking his clearance over his interests of which he has no need-to-know."
The later might also apply to others we have encountered in the UFO field, who have or once had high-level government employment involving national security issues.
All of this appears to support my position: when national security meets the UFO world, real concerns are at stake.
Another item of interest in the DIS file is a memo from DIS dated May 14th, 1986, with a paragraph that states:
It has come to our attention that subject [Graham] has had frequent correspondance with the U.S. Air Force regarding UFOs. His correspondance may be reviewed by contacting Col. Barry Hennessey, USAF, Office of Special Investigations, at the Pentagon (telephone number 494-9495).
It was the USAF OSI that informed the FBI that the MJ-12 document being circulated in the fall of 1988 was "BOGUS" -- which apparently was enough for FBI to shut down their own investigative effort, which had gone all the way to FBIHQ:
Dallas notes that within the last six weeks, there has been local publicity regarding "OPERATION MAJESTIC-12"... Dallas [FBI] realizes the purported document is over 35 years old, but does not know if it has been properly declassified... The Bureau is requested to discern if the document is still classified."
A memo dated 12/2/88 FM DIRECTOR FBI to FBI DALLAS with original classification marked SECRET, states:
The Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Air Force, advised on November 30th, 1988, that the document was fabricated. Copies of the document have been distributed to various parts of the United States. The document is completely bogus.
Dallas is to close captioned investigation.
Note that in the released documentation, there is no indication of who or what was behind the fabrication, other than the information came from the USAF AFOSI.
On 12/4/2000, Graham filed a FOIA request to Air Force OSI:
"If the Air Force knows that the Briefing Document Operation MJ-12 is a fabrication and bogus they would possess records of proof for same..."
Even more curious, Graham writes:
I had sent a copy of the still classified [as marked] Briefing Document Operation Majestic 12 to Vice President Dan Quayle requesting its classification and authenticity status. The document was returned to me in its UNCLASSIFIED form as part of a Defense Investigative Service File number 89311-DK1-3408-1W9 I had received under the Freedom of Information Act. I had been investigated by the Defense Investigative Service because in my letter to Vice President Dan Quayle I I had included the designation of F-117 [stealth aircraft] in connection with SENIOR TREND which was at the time still classified information.
It should be noted that under official document marking guidelines:
Information may not be considered for classification unless it follows into one of the categories specified in section 1.5 of the EO 12958:
a. military plans, weapons systems or operations;
b. foreign government information;
c. intelligence activities (including special activities), intelligence sources or methods,
or cryptology;
d. foreign relations or foreign activities of the U.S., including confidential sources;
e. scientific, technological, or economic matters relating to the national security;
f. U.S. Government programs for safeguarding nuclear materials or facilities;
g. vulnerabilities or capabilities of systems, installations, projects or plans relating to the
national security.
As for the markings which fall under this umbrella requirement of US Classification:
TOP SECRET (TS)
SECRET (S)
CONFIDENTIAL (C)
UNCLASSIFIED (U)
Clearly the UNCLASSIFIED designation in the documents returned to Graham would indicate the Briefing Document MJ-12 must have fallen under one of the categories above.
Graham then requests of the OSI:
"If the Briefing Document Operation Majestic 12 was fabricated and bogus -- Under the Freedom of Information Act 5 U.S.C. I respectfully request a copy of that record that proves such a fact."
Graham received confirmation of the receipt of his request from HQ AFOSI on Feb. 6, 2001:
"Our average processing time, from receipt of request to response to the requester is approximately 60 - 90 days."
More than a year passes, until Graham finally receives the response to his request from HQ AFOSI, dated Feb. 14, 2002.
So, what did the USAF OSI have to say about their statement to FBI concerning the "BOGUS" Briefing Document Operation Majestic 12? Perhaps a redacted file, a memo to FBI, anything at all to support the 1988 claim that the document had been "fabricated?"
"The Air Force Office of Special Investigation is not maintaining any files identifiable with your request... We also consulted with other AFOSI offices to determine if the responsive documents existed. AFOSI does not possess any documentation that gave the Air Force permission to circulate the reference documents... we have searched our files and cannot locate any records relating to Operation Majestic 12."
