Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1996 -> Dec -> Special Operations Manual 1-01 - Part 2

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: jan@cyberzone.net (Jan Aldrich)
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 16:15:14 -0800
Fwd Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 00:56:59 -0500
Subject: Special Operations Manual 1-01 - Part 2

Special Operation Manual No. 1-01  Posting #2.

List of comments.

                           COVER

*1.  The word "RESTRICTED" is placed on the cover.  Restricted was a
security classification that was being phased in 1954.  Restricted Data
(RD) and Formerly Restricted Data (FRD) are used to refer to nuclear
weapons data.  Use of the word RESTRICTED, therefore, causes confusion
especially since the cover is the only place it is used.  Security
regulations at the 1954 do not have a special use for the word other
than those cited above.  Nowhere in the text of the manual is this use
addressed.

2.  The classification of "SOM 1-01" on the cover is not indicated.  (See
below 6)

*3. The designation TO 12D1-3-11-1 is not explained anywhere in the
manual.  The Army and the Air Force issued many joint manuals.  The
Army's designation would be TM (Technical Manual) and a series of
number(and sometime letters.)  The Air Force designation TO (Technical
Order) was also used in smaller lettering/numbering as in this case.  A
research item would be to look up the TO-12D1-3-11-1 in the index of Air
Force Technical Orders.  (A prediction is that it will refer to an
unclassified packaging manual.)

4.  What is the security classification of "TO-12D1-3-11-1"? (See below
6)

5.  What is the security classification of the manual title?  (See below
6)

6.  There is no short title.  The security classification of numerical
and title determine the classification of documents that refer to these
titles and designations.  To allow manuals to be cited in lower
classified security documents a "short title" either unclassified or a
lower classification is created.  While this procedure was not effective
in 1954, a modification should have been made later and added to the
cover.

7.  "Eyes Only" is not a security classification.  It is sometimes used
as a communication procedure and sometimes as custom in the military.  It
sounds very "James Bond."  However, when used in communication it is
generally directed to one named individual.  I would very much like to
see a security manual that covers "Eyes Only."

8. There should be on the cover somewhere  "copy #---- of----copies."
This was a printed manual.  Each copy should be serial numbered.  (See
below  9)

*9. There is no Top Secret Control Number.  The US Army Europe Supplement
to Army Regulation 380-5 has a good designation, not used universally
throughout the Army, Continuous Controlled Accountability (CCA), but
helpful in understanding the security procedures for Top Secret and other
specially classified documents.  Top Secret, Communication Security items
such as codes and key material (COMSEC), NATO Secret are CCA documents.
 They must be individual accounted for (that means control and serial
numbers), an individual is always signed for them, and they must be under
control of that individual or in an authorized security container.  In
addition each person that looks at a Top Secret document is required to
sign a form that he has read it.  The argument has been made on this list
that Top Secret documents have been found in the archives that do not
have TS control number.  This is argument by exception and is
meaningless.  Such documents appear to be security violations.  A
security violation does not negate the regulation--it is a violation of
the regulation.  Just as someone who commits murder but is never caught
does not negate the law against murder.  Archived documents also have to
a certain extent been demilitarized or sanitized so the argument does not
necessarily apply.  SM 1-01 does not appear to be an archived document,
but an active document.  As such, there were almost 40 years to correct
this major deficiency, but no one bothered.

This is extraordinary considering the almost constant admonishment
against security lapses in the manual itself.

10.  The manual, issued by the MAJESTIC--12 GROUP, has what appears to be
an US Army seal.  Army manual from this period carried such seals.

11.  The security warning appears to be incomplete.  Most--although I
can't say all--usually enumerate the penalties for security violations.

12.  There is not page count.  Most, not all manuals of this time would
have a page count so the accountable individual could easily verify that
the manual was complete.

Jan Aldrich