Covert Intelligence Involvement with ET-Contact Witnesses
An Interview With Melinda Leslie
by Randy Koppang
Melinda Leslie has investigated evidence for “covert intelligence” surveillance and re-abduction of ET-contact witnesses for over twelve years. She has worked with over a hundred experiencers and researchers of this phenomenon. Melinda may be the leading researcher of evidence for so-called Covert Intelligence Surveillance and Monitoring of ET contact witnesses. She has lectured extensively on the subject. Her research shows that it is because alien abductions are real that these agencies have become involved.
Our purpose in articulating this phenomenon is to provide insight into a twofold proposition: one: possible Intel-involvement in the lives of certain private citizens, and two the parameters of public policy connotations posed by the greater ET/UFO issue. Point one can be recognized as an applied function of point two given the preeminent pattern availed through 58 years of ET data collection. This pattern establishes representatives of the U.S. military-industrial structure as filling formative roles in the unfolding saga.
A fair and accurate status report on UFO studies confirms an increasingly coherent body of evidence. The coherency derives from correlations and patterns between anecdotal, documental and physical evidence. Culturally, like any other actual set of circumstances, the facts of an ET presence are symbolically evident in all social arenas. Yet, the human involvement circumstances discussed here are an area of investigation conspicuously neglected by the UFO research community.
The most lucid and consistently validating documentation of an ET presence are official F.O.I.A. releases, correlating with archival or “leaked” Majestic Twelve (MJ-12) Project files. People officially representing the agencies of origin for these documents never acknowledge their existence, of course. The reason for no official recognition of the UFO history is born out of long-term political implications; i.e., it’s a global security issue. In an ET presence context, “security” means re-enforcing and buttressing the consensus paradigm of perception upon which the management of global resources depends.
The body of evidence for Covert Intel-involvement confirms both the credibility and the logic of MJ-12 references to reverse engineering of ET technology. Such research and development pursuits, like any weapons program, would only be viable under absolute secrecy. It’s probable the CIA’s classified Robertson Panel Report set a precedent for this latter-day Intel-monitoring. This 1953 report recommended civilian UFO research organizations “be watched because of their potentially great influence on mass thinking if widespread sightings should occur.”
In other words, for all people advocating the UFO/ET issue who demand an official disclosure of the facts, the facts do not bear out a basis for concluding such a disclosure scenario. The facts implicitly provide a basis for observing what has been reported: a fifty year policy/program of monitoring and surveillance of evidentiary witnesses; and media spin-control of the available facts. The policy of non-disclosure is a closed system. Alleged “insider” accounts of this system identify the insurance for keeping it closed: a private corporate structure has been ordained as custodian of the “issue.” As retired insider Bill Uhouse has termed it: “It’s not the U.S. government … I call it ‘the Satellite Government'”!
Public opinion may tend to define the policy of non-disclosure as a “cover-up.” Yet, the cover-up thesis fails to clearly apprehend the purpose of evidentiary “leaks,” in the forms of documentation and unofficial verification by former “insiders.” Inexorably, confidential facts would be expected to “leak” out. However, the Realpolitik of ET-nondisclosure insures that information entering the public domain systematically conforms to skeptical biases of media “spin.”
The most recent example was the ABC Special UFOs – Seeing Is Believing, hosted by Peter Jennings, 24 Feb. 2005. For thirty years, network TV has acclimated public perceptions to UFO/ET details via such broadcasts, and long-term series like Project UFO, Sightings and In Search Of. What was censored by omission is our topic here.
Randy: In an effort to remedy such disinforming biases, Melinda, please define what you call the monitoring and re-abduction of witnesses by intelligence teams, and itemize your categories of evidence for such cases.
Melinda: To define my research is to say it is some of the greatest evidence for the reality of the alien-abduction scenario. Some abductees – not all by any means – but many report also having varying degrees of apparently covert-Intelligence, and military or paramilitary involvement. They have, at the very least, low levels of harassment, and surveillance in their lives. This increases further to deeper levels of involvement. Cases report everything from direct low level confrontations, to higher levels of helicopter flyover harassment; phone tampering with interrupted conversations; tampering of their mail.
Then, it rises to the level of cases actually being watched, being followed, then being approached in direct confrontation. People show up at their home, or show up where they work, confronting them; people threatening abductees away from the subject! Ultimately, there is actual direct case involvement, where there are what I call re-abductions where the ET-experiencer then may get re-picked up by these either covert-Intelligence or paramilitary types, but definitely humans. The witnesses are taken to a human environment, and often interrogated about their experience.
There are frequently certain questions: everything from ET motives to ET technology; both of those are hit on a lot, those subjects. Then, even a further level of involvements I’m finding, is a deepening control in their lives. Their lives start to be more manipulated. They have someone in their life, one abductee coined a minder: someone who is there in their life to ‘mind’ them, to watch them, to surveil them. Minders take a role in their life. This is someone who befriended them. It can begin as an interesting relationship with an ‘insider’ that comes up. But there seem to be other motives by the ‘insider’ where, on the one hand, he’s providing information to the abductee; on the other hand, he’s also getting information. Or, a combination thereof, where it’s all about either he wants to retrieve info, or wanting to be overly helpful. The ‘insider’ influences the abductee into the direction they go with the witness’s own personal investigation, or with their going public, etc.
In addition, there’s manipulation in the form of financial control. A lot of cases having deeper involvement feel their finances are manipulated so they can be controlled and limited. And there’s some pretty good evidence for this happening.
Randy: Does it seem the minders or monitors are applying various persuasion techniques to primarily prevent abductees from divulging their contact experiences?
Melinda: In some cases, yes. There’s a mix of this going on. My point being, it’s clear to the witnesses the one or more monitors in their lives are involved because my cases are abductees, because they have those experiences. In some cases it’s encouraging to the witness, in some cases it’s very discouraging.
Randy: So overall the system is heterogeneous, it’s not designed to apply one limited approach or tactic of persuasion?
Melinda: Usually, it tends to be more discouraging. In fact, I’ll quote one witness who quoted her minder. The person involved with her claimed they were involved in the UFO subject and the UFO community “to derail the train,” quoting the minder. I also have some cases reporting people involved who seem so forthcoming with information, and so encouraging, you can’t just say there’s one agenda.
There also seem to be deeper levels of control, influencing what witnesses may say about it, the way it’s said and the kind of information given. Like, they’re being influenced by encouraging them to talk about certain subjects; while maybe not talk about others.
Again, my point is there’s this deeper level of involvement. In some cases it can be the witness starts dating someone with Intel-involvement. Or, just having someone who’s highly placed in the military-industrial complex (M-IC), or in military intelligence, or ex-CIA, or NASA, or other agency, who suddenly shows an interest and becomes friends with them. When, prior to having their contact experiences, this monitor-type wouldn’t normally be someone the witness could be friends with.
Even in my own experience I admit to having this, but I’ve come across it in other cases. There’s dating with individuals involved. At times, the witness reluctantly becomes associated, not just romantically, but simply in a friendship, where the witness may have one of these people who constantly attends events they have; constantly calling them on the phone.
Randy: In other words, a pattern occurs. The commonality between cases is an introductory, mundane interest in a witness’s life, leading to the witness divulging their abductee experience. Then, there’s a realization that this new acquaintance shows a very unusual, if not dedicated, inquiry in their experience. Ultimately, this reveals the pattern where these inquisitors are ‘insider’ people, of varying degrees: they have a background lending itself to the relative scenario and purpose of the agencies they actually represent: the M-IC.
Melinda: Sure, sure! Absolutely. And the witnesses, wanting to find someone to confide in, they want someone who understands, is supportive, and is forthcoming with information, who maybe provides details and answers. Helping the witnesses understand what’s happening to them, just having the feeling you’ve got someone providing information and verification of your experience, leads you on to be very forthcoming with personal background. You know, the question then becomes, who are these minders working for; where is this information going? I don’t clearly know the answer to that.
At square one, you have people who feel or believe they’ve had an abduction experience. They usually conclude this based on the memories, or recalled memories. Also, a certain amount of anatomical evidence. Often they feel this has occurred periodically throughout their life; more than once. Again, this may not be a person who even goes public. Yes, such attention would seem obvious for an abductee who’s gone public. But, in many cases, these are people who are very quiet about their experiences. They have not gone public!
I’ve been dealing with a new case just referred to me by someone who has not gone public, not known, doesn’t even know much about the abduction subject. Yet, is having this happen. And she says, ‘This is gonna sound crazy, but I’m having …’ And she’ll tell me something and of course she’s telling me something I’ve heard a hundred others tell me. Because I’ve worked with, probably, I could safely say over a hundred people with these experiences; probably over forty people quite in depth.
Randy: Regarding the thoroughly anonymous witnesses, why would they have invented this scenario? After a number of years of gathering the anecdotal cases, there is a very important pattern here. In the sense that experiencers have attracted the attention of the ‘monitors/insiders’, how were they detected and identified as being abductees and qualifying for this unusual attention? This brings us back to the media. These cases have not been emphasized; abductions, yes. Not re-abductions by human Intel. More important, prominent abduction investigators have gone out of their way to play down or intentionally choose not to emphasize re-abduction cases.
Melinda: Yes, that’s right.
Randy: Even though there’s not a lot of attention paid to re-abduction/harassment generally, this is even more unusual than the skeptically-dubious ET-abduction scenario. In other words, if re-abductions were fictitious, what would be the goal? The witnesses aren’t trying to publicize themselves. And, you say, they’re obviously embarrassed about the weirdness of the monitoring in any case. They’re in fear of being classified as paranoid, etc. And you’ve discerned that professional investigators are not too interested. So, the witnesses seem to find you, Melinda, as a last resort.
Melinda: And it’s not so much they want to simply tell someone. They want to understand. And most of the abductees who have this happen – at any of the levels of involvement – when they have any of this happen, they’re pretty much certain they are the only one.
Then, they wonder, ‘What is it about me; or my case; or my experience that makes me of interest to these guys?’ They begin to question themselves, question their sanity. They have this dichotomy: ‘OK, well this has happened. I’ve got these guys involved. So, is this evidence for the fact I’ve had something very real happen.’ And there’s the other part saying, ‘Well, these guys can’t really be causing all this to be happening.’ And they start thinking they’re paranoid.
So, when the cases read an article, or are referred to me, they go, ‘Oh, my goodness! I’m not alone!’ So, usually they want to talk to me just to find validation and verification; to understand they are not alone, that they are not crazy … and it’s happening to quite a few. All the major researchers have at least some cases of Mil-Intel involvement. Some of them have multiple cases.
I’ve so far worked with cases of ET-abduction who are quite average in every other aspect of their life. They have nothing going on to warrant monitoring or an interest by the government, or special-ops, or covert-Intelligence agents, at all! And, when it comes down to the way they’re being monitored, they are surveiled and harassed, and followed directly after an experience; and directly in relationship to if they’ve gone public, or if they are thinking about going public.
Of course, the questioning, the interrogation, or the “minding” and befriending someone is in direct relationship to questions and information about ET-experiences. In other words, there’s nothing there to suggest any other reason for the interest, other than their abduction. Some remaining categories of evidence for the Intel-involvement are: agents taking photos; eyewitnesses to re-abductions and harassment/surveillance; break-ins with photos or documents missing; bruises after an experience; other physical symptoms; photos of helicopter fly-bys; being drugged with medical lab tests; seeking an installation location you were taken to, and later verifying its existence.
Randy: Yes, due to the systematic methods you report, a clearly military-industrial set of motives are at work in your cases. Deductively, this is likely, since, the most persuasive lowest common denominator in all ufological study converges on various military correlations. The most reputable was the Col. Philip J. Corso account of crashed ET saucers. It’s perhaps predictive that if an ET/crashed saucer/MJ 12 nexus is accurate, a scenario such as yours would surface. Clearly, all your facts are internally consistent with the uniformity of data amassed over decades: that the military-industrial milieu holds the best ET evidence.
Melinda: Going back to the issue of technology, again, based upon crash retrievals, based on the military wanting to build craft, there does seem to be a military mindset at work. The group running this covert operation or task force is military in nature, is paramilitary. It’s military bases; it’s known underground military bases; it’s science installations that have military purposes; it’s guys in uniforms and military equipment. I mean, everything, about what the abductees are reporting. When you go back to the study of crash retrieval cases, it seems to be consistent: crash retrievals were handled by the military. The ET technology went to the military for military purposes.
Randy: It’s the military-industrial interlock, you know, with its revolving door. And the industrial actually does the development.
Melinda: Yes. So based on that, if there’s a military pattern of interest – and I return to the abductees – what is it they are questioned about? They’re being interrogated about how the ET technology functions, and especially some of the more exotic functions.
In their development of these more exotic alien-derived technologies from crash retrievals, if they’re receiving information other than from crash retrievals alone, but regardless, there seems to be this aspect of the direct-interface between the alien or person, mentally. In order to be able to navigate, operate or fly alien craft, you must employ this direct-interface capability. And the abductees realize there’s a certain genetic component to be able to operate the ET technology. This has everything to do with the ETs. In some of the technology you have to be an alien in order to operate it.
Randy: I recall you explaining how an ‘insider’ revealed to you that answers about the design of ET craft were derived from alien autopsies in the Bluebook 13 report.
Melinda: And they realize there’s a physical interface requiring a certain amount of alien genetics. There’s obvious things: from size, and the way their eyes function, or how their hearing may function. Even down to ways that they may function mentally. And in military-industrial development, I think they’ve come across some blocks: incompatible areas they’re trying to get through in this understanding.
Now, one thing, going back to basic ET-abduction experience, is telepathy. This is direct-mental interface: the ability by the alien to give abductees, in one whole thought if you will, on how to operate a piece of technology. There seems to be a lot of this in abductee experiences. The technology seems able to read your thoughts! Just as the ETs reportedly communicate that way, there’s a direct communication with the technology itself.
Randy: Another correlation. The evidence suggests experiencers routinely perceive they were partaking in a ‘learning curve’ where, in their period of adjustment in having encounters, they progressively learn parapsychological behaviors. Coincidentally, in the area of your human interference cases, one of the primary objectives of the monitors is information about this psychic interface between user and techni. Of course, is this a fortuitous coincidence, one between witness reports of their inquisitors being really interested in their psychic knowledge and technical projections toward human-interface R&D goals? Perhaps it’s no coincidence at all.
Melinda: Exactly! And you can extrapolate even more from that. It’s also the psychic abilities of the experiencers themselves: everything from remote viewing to other various psychical abilities. In their claim to produce these advanced mental states, there’s an interest in the abductees in that way. The interest is how they interface with ET technology; how did they react to it, what were their reaction times? Was the technology itself instructing them or were ETs instructing them?
Returning to possible genetic components to this, ET abilities infer a genetic determinant for what seems natural for them, and there is something about abductees that may make them predisposed, genetically, to be able to do psychic procedures.
Now, the truth is, I don’t know if it’s a ‘chicken or egg’ question: if it’s something about abductees, generally to begin with, making ETs contact them? Or, if the ETs have done something to us genetically to enhance our abilities? Probably, it’s a combination of both. Is it that ETs are randomly selecting people – no! There seem to be some common traits among abductees. Researchers generally agree there is a pattern of personality traits, and possible genetic makeup to abductees; consistently, this being part of the ET scenario.
Randy: You mean the primary abduction investigators have identified a pattern of their cases following family lineages?
Melinda: Yes! Family histories. This suggests there’s been a continual monitoring of a genetic heritage.
Randy: This family pattern would not be easily explained if abduction were totally fictitious. This is also what led therapists to conclude, whatever ‘abduction’ is, it is not random, right?
Melinda: Exactly. So, figuring the time displaced throughout a family lineage: has there been a continual genetic manipulation, in order to achieve an ultimate end? … All the above is evident in basic abduction research. And certainly these Intel-forces, who are spending so much effort on tech R&D, plus genetic research, logically, they would ask ‘how can we benefit from it?’
Randy: There’s black-ops genetic research vs. mainstream commercial genetic research; there’s commercial tech R&D vs. black-budget R&D. Tim Weiner got the Pulitzer Prize for his book Blank Check, on black-budget operations. But the principle of connectedness here is the element of time. Where the commitments to exotic phenomena are congruent among those respective facts, and by each having such a thing in common, they are congruent with each other over a long period of time.
Melinda: And there’s also now evidence suggested in my research, this Covert Mil-Intel involvement with abductees is not new. So, as you can say the ET-abduction has been happening and is well documented for decades, you could say for the same amount of time there’s been the covert-monitoring aspect. It’s logical. As intelligence forces learned more, they would want to know even more, as their tech-methods evolved in capability to pursue more.
Randy: If we do have evidence for a clearly concerted effort by military-industrial Intel to pursue this, the illicit methods must impinge on the UFO disclosure policy. The UFO community has found, historically, an unofficial policy of non-disclosure of the ET/UFO issue. Yet, the best evidence for an authoritative awareness is voluminous pages of official F.O.I.A. files. So, for all the people in the UFO community who wish to organize the community politically for persuading an official disclosure, Melinda, what do you think your information holds for providing an insight into the historic policy of refusing to officially recognize any of this ET issue?
Melinda: I think, if you reduce that to a single common denominator, it’s because there is too much to lose by disclosing it; there’s too much to gain by continually keeping it secret. Obviously, there’s a huge amount of black-budget corporate spending and justification which self perpetuates a cover-up; so much at stake regarding both loss of funding and financial gain from the development.
There’s a structural dynamic implemented, including massive corporate monies, to fund this. Based upon the history it appears to be working: everything from black-project technologies to development of the exotic craft people are ‘sighting.’ Certainly with the black triangles, that may be the case. If what we’re seeing with the involvement is going on, there’s an infrastructure of exo-political influence put in place for the purpose of implementing the system. All this would be based on our evidence. But, if they feel that disclosure is a threat, they may feel this because they don’t have a handle on it. Not in such a way that if presented to society it won’t cause a collapse of civilization as we know it.
Randy: You mean collapse of the paradigm …
Melinda: Exactly! They don’t want to collapse the paradigm. The paradigm, as a social structure, is, well, it’s not really working, but it works on a level. It works in its denial of the fact that it’s not working; the paradigm structure of society is the world economy and how it functions as a set of perceptions. There’s no way to come out with this information in a way to not collapse that.
Randy: A different paradigm or system of perceptual consensus would be needed to digest ET facts. The de facto shift in reality took place sixty years ago, but only for the handful of humans ‘cleared’ to have ‘a need to know’! So, it would be unprofitable to now disclose. There’s no precedent for it either.
Melinda: Yes, the reality of it, and what the ET technology brings to us. This is where we need to go as a human family. Yet, when you change that paradigm, when it does change, things happen – it’s called revolution! The power structure is benefiting from this financially. If you go back to that corporate power structure, you return to a system pursuing a path. Disruption of that path would mean the viability of it being too drastically changed.
Now I can get into something here, that in this interface with ETs comes a new paradigm; a way of being, a way of consciousness; a way where people operate as more than their physical bodies. Where, for instance, you’re able to remote view, to manipulate matter with your mind. I believe as we move toward more interaction with alien cultures, this paranormal way of being will increase. I believe it’s already there. And it’s one of the reasons the Intel-monitors are interested in abductees to suppress these behaviors. Not necessarily to suppress it in abductees themselves because the M-IC wants to develop the psychic, but the monitors do not want abductees to empower other people to be able to do so. Such empowerment lessens manipulation and control: social engineering.
Randy: Right. The 911 reactionary advertisement of terrorist fear-mongering keeps collective consciousness in the second chakra survival mode. Capitalizing on the ‘fear premium.’
Melinda: I think that’s one of the driving factors. Just economics alone would be reason to keep a lid on this. But also it’s about their ability to remain in power by keeping others disempowered and I think they’ve developed it so far out in the black R&D world. They know when that Genie is out of the bottle, the gig is up!
On the same note it also appears that some of the minders seem to be allowing certain information out. There may be a desire by some on the inside to slowly bring [unofficial] change around. But it’s about the control of such a release; it’s about a controlled change. This approach does seem to be present. Yet, this controlled release of information is not about an end to the cover-up! It’s just about manipulating the cover-up in a different way.
Randy: The system itself is a system of non-disclosure. The National Security State is the politicization of an occult sensibility. There are always people wanting to leak things out, whether it’s MJ 12 files or more prosaic information.
Melinda: But that doesn’t mean the paradigm creating the non-disclosure is changing.
If we take the best documentary UFO evidence we have: the MJ-12 documents collected by Bill Moore, Tim Cooper, Bob Wood, F.O.I.A. documents collected by John Greenwald and Clifford Stone, Bruce Maccabee’s FBI documents, Stanton Friedman’s archival documents, and Richard Dolan’s National Security State history, and if we use these on a predictive basis, we might say that Melinda Leslie’s case histories would become Exhibit A. Given the authorial intent of the national security mindset that created these voluminous files, the powers-that-be would be in dereliction of duty if they did not monitor these witnesses!
Thus, Melinda is reporting on the personal interface with those keeping tabs on the issue. The gross body of UFO data can be viewed as a basis for recognizing that Covert-Intel involvement is a logical procedure to be expected. In this setting, the minding / re-abduction scenario would not be an anomaly.
©2005 Randy Koppang. Randy is a frequent writer for Paranoia and for Xenochrony: www.xenochrony.net. Melinda Leslie may be reached at Melinda_Leslie@msn.com.