From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 19:46:32 -1000
Fwd Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 08:10:12 -0400
Subject: Re: Phillip Corso & NSC - Salla


>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 01:23:39 EDT
>Subject: Re: Phillip Corso & NSC

<snip>

>>>>>>>>From: Michael Salla <exopolitics.nul>
>>>>>>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>>>>>Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:05:24 -1000
>>>>>>>>Subject: Re: Phillip Corso & NSC

><snip>

>>>>>>>>http://www.cia.gov/csi/kent_csi/docs/v03i4a05p_0003.htm

>>>>>>>>Certainly, Cutler was clear about the role played by the "NSC
>>>>>>>>Operations Coordinating Board." Cutler viewed it as integral
>>>>>>>>part of the NSC system and part of the NSC itself.

>Notice that Cutler nowhere says that the OCB was an integral
>part of the NSC "throughout its entire history 1953-1961" as you
>claimed in a previous posting. Cutler does not put dates like
>"1953-1961" on his organizational titles, his account is very
>generalized. He's talking about the idealized functioning of OCB
>and the NSC at the end not the detailed history up to that
>point.

>Cutler does not mention Jackson's reports in 1954 and 1956
>critical of the OCB's powerlessness and Eisenhower's 1957
>Executive Order rectifying that by merging the OCB into the NSC.
>Cutler's failure to mention the profound shortcomings of the NSC
>and OCB under his tenure are not surprising since it would
>reflect badly on his own performance, something you have trouble
>understanding. Since Cutler omits to mention the Jackson reports
>and the President's Executive Order merging OCB into the NSC,
>Cutler's historical remarks cannot possibly qualify as a valid
>detailed history.

>Your "revisionist history" trashes the Eisenhower Executive
>Order as a needless exercise because you allege, contrary to all
>credible evidence, that the OCB was doing just fine and was
>already part of the NSC "functionally." What a joke!
>
>Talk about absurd euphemisms, the OCB was NOT "functioning" and
>that's why it had to be fixed. You twist this history to its
>polar opposite of the truth just to rescue your phony UFO
>"whistleblower" (actually leaker and fabricator) Corso who
>repeatedly lied to say he had been an illustrious "NSC Member"
>or on the highly impressive "NSC Staff" but usually forgot to
>even mention the OCB.

>Contrary to your desperate "revisionist" inventions, the OCB did
>not "evolve" into a closer and closer relationship to the NSC,
>but remained in the same static ineffectual position of pleading
>for "voluntary cooperation" from government departments in 1954
>when Jackson complained that this system was not working (and
>that the OCB needed to be made a part of the NSC), as it did in
>1956 when Jackson continued to complain that OCB was not working
>and needed to made a part of the NSC.

>Same in 1954 as in 1956, the OCB was not working because it was
>_not_ part of the NSC and thus did not have the NSC's authority
>to enforce compliance with directives, as Jackson reported to
>the President. You just flatly evade these facts.

>Under OCB's founding charter, Eisenhower's Executive Order
>10483, the OCB had no independent power or authority to order
>any agency to comply with its wishes or the NSC's directives.

>The OCB could only "advise the agencies concerned" and
>"initiate... proposals."

>You cannot produce a shred of evidence that, prior to its merger
>with the NSC, the OCB could order departments and agencies to
>act and could enforce its own orders. To the contrary there is
>indisputable proof from Jackson's reports, and those of other
>agencies and consultants, who found OCB could not enforce
>compliance and that the system was not working because OCB was
>independent of the NSC and not a part of the NSC. Those experts
>on the scene in the 50's found that the OCB's separate-from-NSC
>status was what needed to be changed, and it was changed - after
>Corso left.
>
><snip>

I have already expressed my reasons as to why the argument you
are making about Col Corso lying when he claimed to be a staff
member to Eisenhower's NSC is weak. Despite this weakness you
are determined to use the little historical evidence that
supports your case, while ignoring contrary historical evidence.
I find that to be a very biased way of dealing with such an
important whistleblower case as Col Corso. Historical
scholarship assesses both sides of the ledger in coming up with
objective appraisals of key historical figures. Corso is a
historical figure in UFOlogy and yet you appear determined to
only give importance to that historical evidence that supports
your case. I find little point in continuing this discussion
with you given the subjective biases that drive your
methodology. Consequently, I will summarize once again what I
believe to be the historical evidence supporting Corso, and
which clearly negates your argument that the Operations
Coordinating Board was not part of the NSC during Corso's
tenure. I will subsequently leave it to others to continue this
thread while I attend to other whistleblower cases I am
currently researching.

I have already pointed out the FBI files mentioning Corso's
service on the OCB NSC . The FBI reference to the OCB as part of
the NSC is a historical document. I have also pointed out Robert
Cutler's description of the OCB during the years 1953 to 1958
where he clearly describes it as being part of the NSC
implementation mechanism. The term he used NSC Operations
Coordinating Board clearly shows that he associated the two
during the period in which Corso served. There of course is also
the Senate document that identifies Corso as a member of
Eisenhower's NSC. These all demonstrate that the OCB was
considered to be a part of the NSC during its entire history.

Now your objections are interesting in the way you spin these to
support your case. You first refer to the historian William
Jackson and his 1954 and 1956 recommendations to have the OCB
formally incorporated into the NSC. You claim that this is
historical evidence supporting your case, and that Jackson was
more reliable than Cutler who was biased because the latter
actually served on the OCB and wanted to gloss over his
failures. Basically, you are saying that a historian/advisor
knew better how the OCB functioned by reading a set of
historical documents, than one of the key people serving on it
who was no less that Eisenhower's Special Assistant. That's a
very contentious point.

Nevertheless, let's assume that Jackson's chief goal was to
strengthen the OCB by formally incorporating it into the NSC.
That by no means excludes what Cutler and others describe of the
OCB as being part of the NSC though informally or de facto. You
say that OCB only became part of the NSC with EO 10700 issued in
1957. However, you overlook that objection that all this
achieved was an reorganization designed to strengthen or make
the OCB more efficient. This doesn't negate its former position
as a de facto part of the NSC by virtue of its reporting and
implementing features for the NSC, and whatever other mechanisms
that were in place that made it part of the NSC system and which
Cutler was very aware of.

What's worth emphasizing is that the NSC under Eisenhower was a
collection of different agencies and committees that worked in
way that was constantly evolving and was described at the time
as the 'NSC system'. So the OCB was part of the NSC system which
was very fluid and nuanced in the various committees and
agencies it had attached to it.  So while you may argue that the
NSC comprised only the cabinet level officials that sat on it
with the President, Secretary of State, etc., the NSC was much
more extensive and loosely organized and comprised
agencies/committee such as the OCB. The proof for this is in the
following extract from the official White House history of the
NSC which can be read online.

Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/history.html#eisenhower

"The genesis of the new NSC system was a report prepared for the
President in March 1953 by Robert Cutler, who became the
President's Special Assistant for National Security Affairs.
Cutler proposed a systematic flow of recommendation, decision,
and implementation that he later described as the "policy hill"
process. At the bottom of the hill, concerned agencies such as
State and Defense produced draft policy recommendations on
specific topics and worked for consensus at the agency level.
These draft NSC papers went up the hill through the Planning
Board, created to review and refine the recommendations before
passing them on for full NSC consideration. The NSC Planning
Board met on Tuesday and Friday afternoons and was composed of
officials at the Assistant Secretary level from the agencies
with permanent or standing representation on the Council, as
well as advisers from the JCS and CIA. Hundreds of hours were
spent by the Board reviewing and reconstructing proposed papers
for the NSC. Cutler resigned in 1958 in exhaustion. The top of
the foreign policy-making hill was the NSC itself, chaired by
the President, which met regularly on Thursday mornings.

The Council consisted of the five statutory members: the
President, Vice President, Secretaries of State and Defense, and
Director of the Office of Defense Mobilization. Depending on the
subject under discussion, as many as a score of other senior
Cabinet members and advisers, including the Secretary of the
Treasury, the Chairman of the JCS, and the Director of Central
Intelligence, attended and participated. The agenda included
regular briefings by the Director of Central Intelligence on
worldwide developments affecting U.S. security, and
consideration of the policy papers advanced by the Planning
Board. The upshot of the discussions were recommendations to the
President in the form of NSC Actions. The President, who
participated in the discussion, normally endorsed the NSC
Action, and the decision went down the hill for implementation
to the Operations Coordinating Board.

President Eisenhower created the Operations Coordinating Board
(OCB) to follow up on all NSC decisions. The OCB met regularly
on Wednesday afternoons at the Department of State, and was
composed of the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs,
Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Directors of CIA, USIA, and
ICA, and the Special Assistants to the President for National
Security Affairs and Security Operations Coordination. The OCB
was the coordinating and implementing arm of the NSC for all
aspects of the implementation of national security policy. NSC
action papers were assigned to a team from the OCB for follow-
up. More than 40 interagency working groups were established
with experts for various countries and subjects. This 24-person
staff of the OCB supported these working groups in which
officials from various agencies met each other for the first
time."

As anyone case from reading this official history of the OCB and
the NSC, the OCB was part of the NSC system and fulfilled the
functions described above. While the organizational status of
the OCB changed over the years, it's functions did not. It began
as part of the NSC system and remained part of it right up to
the time of Kennedy's dissolution of the OCB. Cutler's reference
to the OCB being at the bottom of the NSC hill and the NSC
itself at the top is very significant since it demonstrates that
the OCB was part of the NSC system.

After perusing all the evidence objectively, I have to conclude
that your argument is quite weak and does not sustain your very
strong claim that Corso lied. Col Corso served with distinction
on a key agency that was part of the NSC system. Your
description of him as a liar is a travesty and I have done my
best to clearly demonstrate this to you. I hope that other
members of this list can themselves reach an objective
conclusion over the historical evidence that has been raised to
support Col Corso's contention that he served on Eisenhower's
NSC.

I hope that the significance of Col Corso as a whistleblower is
reconsidered on this list on the basis of the historical
evidence that supports Corso's description of himself. Corso's
credibility has been unfairly criticized by those not willing to
objectively consider the historical evidence supporting Corso. I
have made my case and will leave it to others to continue this
thread if they wish.


Aloha

Michael Salla