John,

I would agree with you that the threat of an alien invasion is remote. However, there might still be some intelligence concerns related to this phenomenon that would be worth our while to consider.

In this regard there has been a clarification by Ron concerning the imputed status of the Phenomenology Network. Contrary to my initial impression, this network has only a virtual existence at present. I am recommending that the network's status be elevated from virtual to informal and that Ron and I should bring this suggestion to Chris Straub, hopefully when we meet with him next week. In making this recommendation we need to consider our mission objectives.

Looking at the Navy's Office of Strategic Phenomena (OSP), as you suggested, we see one side of the phenomenology issue. I understand that Ron's associate, Owen Lewis, and his Photon Research are prime contractors for that project, so there is already a step in the right direction. The environmental impact on our SIGINT covers the major part of the government's concern. There is also a HUMINT side to phenomenology and that is where our IPN could provide some unique input. To be comprehensive, though, these two components should be integrated at some level. The integrative function would be a prime concern for the IPN.

There is a further and very significant integrative function and that is between the government and civilian interests in phenomenology. Particularly under a democratic regime and in peacetime we do not want to alienate the legitimate civilian concerns relative to possibly extra-scientific phenomena. The IPN could play a small role in diffusing and defusing these public concerns. Beyond that amelioration, there ought to be a constructive role for the public on the HUMINT side.

I put these thoughts to you, John, as a potential Non-Lethal and UFO consultant to the IPN. Clearly our patriotic duty beckons.

Dan

.

rev. 5/27/98