UFO Flight Training

[ PHOTO ( above ): Nellis AFB Range Test Site S4 UFO Flight Simulators ( click to enlarge ) ]

UFO Flight Training
by, Concept Activity Research Vault ( CARV )

November 10, 2011 13:22:08 ( PST ) Updated ( Originally Published: January 25, 2011 )

NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE – November 10, 2011 – Had one not been familiar with the official background on such subjects, they might have quickly nominated a certain gentleman ( reported about below ) to receive a U.S. Academy Award ‘secondary prize’ of ‘free mental health treatment’, but after carefully considering this subject to be reported, some may see where ‘this particular information’ certainly ‘pushes the envelope of reality’ – beyond where most professionals never venture.

– – –

IMPORTANT NOTICE:

All information – contained within this report ( below ) – was obtained from ‘official U.S. federal government sources’ ( applicable ‘quoted texts’, ‘images’ and ‘videos’ – below ), ‘worldwide mainstream news media public broadcasts ( ‘text’ and ‘videos’ – below )’, ‘multiple other officially recognized as being publicly reliable information sources’ plus all those are provided additionally in a long list of “References” ( found at the bottom of this report ). The only exception a ‘usual journalistic speculative digest of remarks ( text )’ aligning ‘official information’ with ‘enhanced clarity’ plus ‘information continuity formatting’ for ‘easier public reading comprehension’.

This website report ‘does not’ asbscribe to any version of ‘religious radicalism’, ‘doomsday prophetics’, ‘conspiratorial theories’ or any ‘other imaginings’ that may or may not be circulating on the internet.

This website publicly reports ‘only factually proven information’ through ‘ardous research’ in ‘adherence to strict principles’ only ‘obtaining official information’ from ‘official information sources’ confirmed by ‘no less than’ two ( 2 ) ‘additional independent sources’. While scientific and technological information may vary, amongst professionals, only those held in ‘good standing’ by a ‘worldwide list of prominent universities’ and ‘other prominent organizations’ provided additional factual support documentation.

This website maintains a ‘private database’ of ‘official documents’ and ‘other credible source information support material’ that ‘officially serves to substantiate all information’ contained in ‘all reports published’ here.

– – –

History may someday reveal more about what the now-late William Uhouse, a mechanical engineer ( 1966 – 1979 ), outlined surrounding ‘official U.S. government contract “business agreements” relating to ’private-sector’ high-risk work involving, amongst a myriad of others, engineering companies, contractors, sub-contractors, engineering consultants and engineers hired to perform extremely dangerous high-risk work involving secret hazards surrounding such work.

Disclosure, for the most-part, is predominantly not a favorite intelligence past time, for the less private-sector individuals know about what surrounds their contracted task assignments, all the better can government maintain its secrets  – until something goes terribly wrong on a U.S. government contractor job site.

A classic example of what could go wrong was presented by a patriotic American, the now-late ( deceased ) Paul Philip Schneider (aka) Phil Schneider, an engineering consultant hired by MORRISON-KNUDSEN INC. ( Tulsa, Okalahoma ) – a sub-contractor company for CER GEONUCLEAR CORP. ( Tulsa, Oklahoma ) that was a subsidiary of the U.S. government contractor company EG&G that maintained a super secret facility building on the ground inside a U.S. government highly restricted Range Test Site ( RTS ) known as the infamously spooky Area 51 near Groom lake, Nevada.

Much like Paul P. Schneider, William Uhouse –  another engineer – at a very late stage in his lifetime began revealing – and consequently became more comfortable ( to ‘some degree’ ) about what he revealed his first-hand knowledge of – and that was, at least ‘four’ ( 4 ) ‘Extraterrestrial Biological Entities’ ( EBE ) commonly referred to as  “Extra-Terrestrials” (aka) ETs (aka) aliens held under U.S. government command directives issued to work alongside private-sector engineers cleared to work on secret-sensitive classified government Programs and Projects at specifically selected locations.

See what I mean? Sounds just like “government conspiracy” material. Well, that too was my initial knee-jerk reaction while I was simultaneously pondering an the ‘free mental health treatment’ prize for ( were he still alive ) Uhouse, however in-lieu of that curious situation, I additionally considered handing myself a ‘similar prize’ for even having considered reporting about this, until looking further into the Uhouse case where eventually all doubt came to evaporate. Doing the research, was ‘no simple task’, especially when the claimant ( Uhouse ) turned-up dead.

According to Bill Uhouse ( see, I immediately start pointing my finger at him! ), these extraterrestrial biological entities ( EBE ) were extracted from an ‘underground bunker’ where supposedly thousands more extraterrestrial biological entities ( EBE ) – controlled by the U.S. government – held in Deep Underground  Military Bases ( D.U.M.B. ) through an elaborate network of tunnels leading to various and sundry equally deep underground pockets of caves / caverns.

I know, by now, those so-far reviewing this will ensure I receive the ‘crazy prize’ instead of ( posthumously ) Uhouse, but not to worry as it only gets worse until getting better when viewing the ‘official government films’ ( further below ), but ‘reading this report further will assist skeptics’ in understanding what can be identified within the videos. Jumping the gun by advancing to view the videos will net ‘little to no information’ so, I’m counting-on ‘official government speed readers’ ( reviewing this report ) to jump-the-gun and do exactly that so, hopefully I won’t be pestered ( by them ) later-on for having publicly reported something too sensitive. I just love doing reports like this.

Bill Uhouse goes on to described – in ‘very specific words’ ( as though he were sending a coded message to someone knowing more about these EBEs ) – the four ( 4 ) beings as what he calls ” Feeling Good Guys ” ( ” FGG ” ) especially selected – by U.S. government officials – for transport ‘away from’ one Nevada ( USA ) facility and ‘sent to’ another facility in New Mexico ( USA ) but then transported ‘back to’ to Nevada ( USA ) at a facility believed to be on the Nellis Air Force Base ( NAFB ) Range Test Site ( RTS ) known as “S4″ ( ’near’ – but ‘not at’ – the infamously spooky Area 51 ) where Uhouse claims these particular four ( 4 ) EBEs or ‘aliens’ were assigned – by an official U.S. government directive – to ‘work alongside private-sector members’ of his ( Uhouse’s ) engineering team assigned likewise to the same U.S. government Program Project.

William Uhouse specifically mentions but ‘one ( 1 ) alien’ ( a “Grey” – bluish-purple skin color type of ‘extraterrestrial biological entity’ – EBE ) intimately that he was told was nicknamed ” JAYROD ” ( also known as ) ” JROD ” ( aka ) ” JRD ” (aka) ” JERROD ” who was presented to him ( Uhouse ) as a ‘personally assigned’  “scientific translator.”

This is ‘not’ the first time the name “Jerrod” has surfaced surrounding Groom Lake, Nevada NAFB S4 and Area 51 extraterrestrial reverse-engineering Program Projects where Bob Lazar referenced someone he claimed was his “friend” he cleverly gave the name “Jerrod” to, and this “Jerrod” was claimed by Bob Lazar to have revealed ‘highly classified historical background information about’ surrounding certain government Program Project activities in the same location areas.

Bill Uhouse claims JAYROD ( the alien Grey ) – also known as – “Jarod” used ‘mental telepathic communication skills’ to receive questions he ( Uhouse ) presented to it ( the alien ), but before he ( Uhouse ) could purse his lips to begin asking audible questions about ’engineering configurations’, JayRod ( alien ) instantly and telepathically transmitted ‘mental telepathy replies’ as ’engineering instructions’ back to Uhouse.

Uhouse was believed to have been dealing with what had been presented elsewhere – during the 1980s – in what was leaked to the public – during the early 21st Century – as ‘alien symbolic construct science technologies’ studying translations of a ‘materials science language’ from a strange looking ‘map’ containing ‘patterned symbols and designs’, which Uhouse ( alone ) could not possibly comprehend in order to properly lead engineering teams into formulating ‘standard basic application designs’ enabling the U.S. government military to develop an actual UFO ‘flight simulator’ – or ‘lenticular craft simulator’ ( “flying disc simulator” ) – specifically designed so ‘only human astronautic experienced pilots’ – assigned to the National Reconaissance Office ( NRO ) and NASA – could learn how to fly UFO type spacecraft equipped with secret extraterrestrial ( ET ) technology capabilities.

Official U.S. Air Force ( USAF ) ‘motion picture film footage’ shows men near one type of “flying disc demonstrator” – wrapped and resting on its ‘container base’ with its ‘container cover’ suspended above it – and film footage of ‘teams of men’ guiding ‘suspended sub-sections’ of a ‘disc’ being ‘assembled’, and ‘partially assembled sub-sections’ of a ‘disc’, plus ‘more’ ( below ):

After carefully studying the video contents thoroughly and comparing all aspects thereof to what surrounded the AVRO ‘manned aerial vehicle’ ( circa: late 1950s – early 1960s ) – test-flown under a BELL LABORATORIES ( Canada ) ”business agreement” contract under U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) supervision ( from the late 1950s through early 1960s ) – these video contents are ‘definitely not’ films of ’any early developmental stages’ of the AVRO aerial vehicle, nor do video contents of any of the discs depicted therein even remotely represent ’test engineering’ or ‘manufacturing’ facilities where even pieces of the AVRO were ever housed – including BELL LABS ( Canada ) and the MITRE CORP. ( USA ).

Should those, reviewing this report, decide I should still be awarded the ‘free mental health treatment prize’ – alluded-to at the beginning of this report – for revealing what was contained herein, please notify me immediately – otherwise try not to appear so shocked as to what you eventually realized from this report – more-so than initially believed.

As for Extraterrestrial Biological Entities (aka) aliens (aka) ETs (aka) Ancient Earth Underground Dwellers (aka) Feeling Good Guys ( FGG ) – and films thereof – one may only be reminded to ask William Uhouse on their final travel.

As for documentation? Read the “IMPORTANT NOTICE:” ( above ), for without such this report would never have been written.

 

Submitted for review and commentary by,

 

Concept Activity Research Vault ( CARV ), Host
E-MAIL: ConceptActivityResearchVault@Gmail.Com
WWW: http://ConceptActivityResearchVault.WordPress.Com

 

Advertisements

Secret ET Technologies

[ NOTE The video ( above ), amidst its computer graphic interface ( CGI ), manipulates many of the actual ‘image document layout photographs of symbolics technology’ and ‘laboratory premise photos of components and sub-structures’ ( removed from the U.S. government classified laboratory Project CARET ), plus ‘select photos’ of unidentified flying objects ( UFO ) bearing similar symbolics worked on by an individual using the alias name “Issac” who publicly released partial details about this story. ]

Secret ET Technologies
by, Concept Activity Research Vault ( CARV )

November 22, 2010 12:37:42 ( PST ) Update ( Published: October 23, 2010 )

USA, California, Menlo Park – November 22, 2010 – What some perceived as chicken footprints  may likely be extraterrestrial symbolic construct technologies. Years ago, an individual – using the alias name “Issac” – conveyed a multi-page report ( ” CARET ” ), laboratory photographs, and detailed personal encounters ( from at least 1984 through 1987 ) on what was believed a U.S. Department of Defense ( DoD ) Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ( DARPA ) Program recruiting to work on a specific Project ( believed Phase II or Phase III ) studying what was ‘officially briefed’ to Issac – amongst his task team –  as highly complex relatives of  ’extraterrestrial’ structures, materials, components, construct language symbolics.

Unwanted Publicity Intelligence Annex report ( herein ) will only provide more detailed analysis on Issac provided information that news media organizations half-heartedly carried to the public years ago.

Extraterrestrial materials, although highly complex to what Issac’s group had ever seen in their lives before, saw supercomputers lumber under tasking extremely complex substrates and geometric symbolics, amongst other secret-sensitive items, that Issac and others analyzed and deciphered.

Within the building, amongst other secret-sensitive items, combinatoric studies were not limited to extremely complex substrates, symbolics, and more that developed an extremely complex ‘primer’ in which Issac’s report is named “Commercial Applications Research for ExtraTerrestrial Technology” ( C.A.R.E.T. or CARET ).

Issac’s personal accounting ( further below ) reports the aforementioned work was conducted within what first appeared as only an upscale industrial office complex ‘building’, presumably located in the State of California County of Santa Clara.

Issac describes his facility adjacencies being multi-compartmentalized ‘individual government contractor offices’ – believed assigned to various sensitive tasks for the United States government – whereupon, amongst other compartmentalized secret characteristics ( never mentioned the facility being a ’self-sealing building’ ), were five ( 5 ) underground floors hidden.

Five ( 5 ) stories down, sub-surface levels – not reported by Issac – but easily ascertained must have included:

– One [ 1 ] underground level dedicated parking for ‘secondary staff’ and/or ‘special visitors ( e.g. military officials, etc. ) standard passenger vehicles; and,

– Two [ 2 ] underground level dedicated parking for ‘equipment delivery’ trucks; and,

– Three [ 3 ] underground level dedicated parking for ‘militarized troop personnel’ vans and/or buses.

Carefull observation, when combining all the aforementioned, initially bring a ‘few new questions’ followed by a few ‘remote suppositions’ ( immediately below ):

1. Could Issac’s seemingly ‘personal account’ have actually been ‘cleverly ghost written’ for ‘someone else’?

2. Could Issac have actually been a ‘female’?

3. Could the ‘name’ of the author, “Issac,” have actually been derived from the ‘name’ of a ‘male sibling or spouse’?

4. Could Issac’s seemingly ‘personal account’ have actually ‘taken place geographically elsewhere’?

“Issac” ‘reports’ ( further below ) begin ‘personal accountings’ by ‘laying a foundation scene’ surrounding the State of California County of Santa Clara “Silicon Valley” industrial technology history. Issac then simply includes a report ‘cover page’ entitled, “Palo Alto CARET Laboratory” so, for all intents and purposes readers may ‘then instantly gravitate with the assumption’ that Issac’s ‘personal account took place in Palo Alto, California’, but then “Issac” mentions – but does not detail – only very few ‘building characteristics’ and uses the most ‘general of terms’. Might Issac have ‘purposely laid such a foundation’ after ‘altering the true facility name on he report’ to only be known as the “Palo Alto CARET Laboratory” or “PACL” when the ‘building’ may have actually been ‘remotely located elsewhere’ albeit within or under a ‘temporary U.S. government contract project’ and/or ‘adjunct’ of yet another larger organization.

Was Issac’s ‘reported building’ just a stand-alone upscale city street-side industrial office building made of normal iron re-enforced concrete / cement walled tilt-up construction?

At the time, of Issac’s personal account’, the former ROCKWELL SCIENCE CENTER PALO ALTO LABORATORY ( 444 High Street, Suite #400, Palo Alto, California 94301 ) existed near a plethora of ‘other such organization buildings’ performing secret-sensitive work in the Silicon Valley area of northern California.

Plenty of such ‘remotely located buildings’ exist.

To name a ‘few’, are ‘buildings remotely situated’ at the U.S. National Laboratory in Los Alamos, New Mexico and although ‘such buildings and private contractors are geographically situated there’, funding secrets are hidden under ‘administrative domain auspices’ of the ‘University of California’.

But where do “Issac’s” reported ‘armed military personnel’ easily appear from in such a ‘building’?

Other ‘remotely situated buildings’ also exist – under U.S. government contract to private companies – on military reservations such as the United States Air Force Research Laboratory ( ARL ) that oversees “PHILIPS Laboratory” secret-sensitive work performed and tested ‘near but not within’ Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico but secretly hidden on that huge ‘reservation’.

[ PHOTO ( above): PHILIPS Laboratory at Kirkland Air Force Base, New Mexico ( USA ) NOTE: click to enlarge photo details. ]

In southern California, Edwards Air Force Base reservation holds unique offerings, amongst other secrets, where after a vehicle passes the ‘entrance sign’ it must continue to be driven an additional 20-miles further before even reaching the ‘main gate’ to gain ‘official admittance’ but with ‘further restricted movement’, whereupon scattered – all around that ‘reservation’ – are a plethora of ‘remotely situated buildings’ under ‘use’ by ‘private business U.S. government contract holders performing, amongst other things, U.S. government secret-sensitive work within a complex of buildings such as  those seen inside Area 51 ( also known as ) the Lazy G Ranch ( also known as ) The Ranch ( Nevada, USA ).

[ PHOTO ( above): Area 51 (aka) Lazy G Ranch (aka) The Ranch ‘main gate’ ( Nevada, USA ) circa 1970s. NOTE: click to enlarge photo details. ]

[ PHOTO ( above): Area 51 (aka) Lazy G Ranch (aka) The Ranch ( Nevada, USA ) circa 1970s. NOTE: click to enlarge photo details. ]

But even Area 51 (aka) the Lazy G Ranch (aka) The Ranch located in the Nevada desert cannot be compared ( here ) to its secret-sensitive  ’sister reservation’ that is only known as a ’proving ground’ someone named ”Dugway” ( Utah, USA ).

In  1968, the U.S. Navy had private contractors build its secret-sensitive China Lake Naval Weapons Station ( near Trona, California ) whereon that ‘reservation’ holds one ( 1 ) building, with eight ( 8 ) subterrainean story floor levels, that is stuck out in the middle of the southern California desert. If the U.S. Navy is a military ship sailing and aircraft flying defense organization, what is it doingwith an 8-story subterrainean building in the middle of a desert?

From within Issac’s given parameter basics describing the reported ‘upscale city industrial office building’ complex – with five ( 5 ) subterrainian stories – the closest resemblance ‘within the State of California County of Santa Clara Silicon Valley area’ that was the  ’unknown building predecessor’ of what later became known as the ‘first privately-owned and operated business’ belonging to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) named QIC ( believed known as ) QUANTUM INTEFACE CENTER ( formerly known as ) IN-Q-IT CORPORATION ( formerly known as ) IN-Q-TEL ( affectionately nicknamed ) CIA-IN-Q-TEL where the CIA business ’special technology’ research and development ( R&D ) was performed – although ‘never fully reported’ about – on ‘applications’ for what would later also be known as ” Commercial Off The Shelf ” ( C.O.T.S. / COTS ) product development of secret-sensitive technologies – ‘products’ in-essence, there would accumulate plenty of, for later distribution –  to be eventually traded for ‘other valuable considerations’ ( only very little press coverage reported it, as “… products to be sold to …”  ) ‘in-exchange’ for which a few ‘private companies’ ( e.g. ‘foreign based company’ PHILIPS, and a few select others ) could possibly offer ‘in-exchange’ for what they ‘could’ or ‘were already providing’ under U.S. government contract(s) that could ‘then’  secretly return U.S. Congress ‘budget approved’ U.S. Department of the Treasury funds by re-routing or mirroring bank wire transferred monies back into the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) private business that could then re-route those monies as deemed fit secretly into yet other out-of U.S. Congressional scrutinized intelligence projects and programs.

But could all this ‘really happen’?

The webpage links ( above ) show who was initially put in-charge and what senior executives were selectively chosen from key private industries that led the private U.S. Central Intelligence Agency business so, it really should come as no surprise to a few understanding mechanics behind international stock market trading and international bank wire transfers between domestic and foreign operations of the United States Federal Reserve System.

[ PHOTO ( above ) : U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) business IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION logo. ]

A few such secret-sensitive self-sealing rad-hard ( anti-radiation hardening concrete / cement via ‘gamma radiation saturation’ ) buildings reposturate – ‘prior to the onslaught of’ a U.S. national emergency – via remote triggering such buildings to submerge their entire mass into underground special covering multi-story holes dug in the ground beneath them.

So, did Issac’s ‘reported building’ have such ‘additional capacities’ or ‘more’?

One might consider such to be more distinct possibilities based on what the “CARET” report entailed and according to “Issac’s” ‘personal accountings’ surrounding such.

Courtesy: Unwanted Publicity Information Group

====

My Experience With The CARET Program And Extra-Terrestrial Technology

by, Isaac [ alias moniker used by the original author ]

June 2007

This letter is part of a package I’ve assembled for Coast to Coast AM [ a nightly broadcast radio station located in the United States of America ] to distribute to its audience. It is a companion to numerous ‘document’ and ‘photo’ scans and should not be separated from them.

You can call me Isaac, an alias I’ve chosen as a simple measure of protection while I release what would be called tremendously ‘sensitive information’ even by todays standards.

‘Sensitive’ is not necessarily synonymous with ‘dangerous’, though, which is why my conscience is clear as I offer this material up for the public.

My government [ United States of America ] has its reasons for its continual secrecy, and I sympathize with many of them, but the truth is that I’m getting old and I’m not interested in meeting my maker one day with any more baggage than necessary.

Furthermore, I put a little more faith in humanity than my former bosses do, and I think that a release of at least some of this information could help a lot ‘more’ than it could ‘hurt’, especially in today’s world.

I should be clear before I begin, as a final note:

I am not interested in making myself vulnerable to the consequences of betraying the trust of my superiors and will not divulge any personal information that could determine my identity.

However my intent is not to deceive, so ‘information that I think is too risky to share’ will be simply ‘left out’ rather than obfuscated in some way ( aside from my alias, which I freely admit is not my real name ).

I would estimate that with the information contained in this letter, I could be narrowed down to one [ 1 ] of maybe 30 to 50 people at best, so I feel reasonably secure.

Some Explanation for the Recent Sightings –

For many years I’ve occasionally considered the release of at least some of the material I possess, but the recent wave of photos and sightings has prompted me to cut to the chase and do so now.

I should first be clear that I’m not directly familiar with any of the crafts seen in the photos in their entirety. I’ve never seen them in a hangar or worked on them myself or seen aliens zipping around in them. However, I have worked with and seen many of the parts visible in these crafts, some of which can be seen in the Q3-85 Inventory Review scan found at the top of this page.

More importantly though, I’m very familiar with the ‘language’ on their [ craft(s) ] ‘undersides’ [ under bellies ] seen clearly in photos by Chad, Rajman, and – ‘another form’ – in the Big Basin photos.

One question I can answer – for sure – is why they are suddenly here.

These crafts have probably existed – in their current form – for decades, and I can say – for sure – that the technology behind [ abut ] them has existed for decades before that.

The ‘language’, in fact – I’ll explain shortly why I keep putting that in quotes – was the subject of ‘my work’ in years past. I’ll cover ‘that’ as well.

The reason they [ extraterrestrial craft(s) ] are suddenly ‘visible’, however is ‘another matter’ entirely.

These crafts – assuming they’re anything like the hardware I worked with in the 1980s ( assuming they’re better, in fact ) – are equipped with technology that enables invisibility. That ‘ability’ can be controlled both ‘on board’ the craft, and ‘remotely’.

However, what’s important in this case is that this ‘invisibility’ can also be ‘disrupted’ by ‘other technology’. Think of it like ‘radar jamming’.

I would bet my life savings ( since I know this has happened before ) that these craft are ‘becoming visible’ and then ‘returning to invisibility’ arbitrarily – probably unintentionally – and undoubtedly for only ‘short periods’ due to the ‘activity of a kind’ of ‘disrupting technology’ [ sonic flocculation ] being ‘set-off elsewhere’ but ‘near-by’.

I’m especially sure of this in the case of the Big Basin sightings where the witnesses themselves reported seeing the craft just ‘appear’ and ‘disappear’.

This is especially likely because of the way the witness described one [ 1 ] of the appearances being only a ‘momentary flicker’, which is consistent with the ‘unintentional’, ‘intermittent triggering’ of such a ‘device’.

It’s no surprise that these sightings are all taking place in ‘California’ ( USA ), and especially the Saratoga Bay / South Bay area.

Not far from Saratoga is Mountain View, California ( USA ) / Sunnyvale, California ( USA ) home to Moffett Field [ formerly, a United States Army Air Corps military airfield / United States Air Force Base ( USAFB ) ] and the [ National Aeronautic Space Administration ] NASA Ames Research center.

Again, I’d be willing to bet – just about anything – that the device capable of hijacking the cloaking of these nearby craft was inadvertently triggered, probably during some kind of experiment, at the exact moment they were being seen.

Miles away, in Big Basin, the witnesses were in the right place – at the right time – and saw the results of this disruption with their own eyes.

God knows what else was suddenly appearing in the skies at that moment, and who else may have seen it.

I’ve had some direct contact with this device, or at least a device capable of the same thing, and this kind of mistake is not unprecedented.

I am personally aware of at least one [ 1 ] other incident in which this kind of technology was accidentally set off, resulting in the sudden visibility of normally invisible things.

The only difference is that these days, cameras are alot more common!

The technology itself is ‘not’ ours, or at least it was ‘not in the 1980s.

Much like the technology, in these crafts themselves, the device capable of remotely hijacking vehicle clacking comes from a non-human source too.

Why we were given this technology has never been clear to me, but it’s responsible for a lot.

Our having access to this kind of device, along with our occasionally hap-hazard experimentation on them, has lead to everything from cloaking malfunctions like this to full-blown crashes.

I can assure you that most ( and in my opinion all) incidents of UFO crashes or that kind of thing had more to do with our meddling with extremely powerful technology at an inopportune time than it did mechanical failure on their part.

Trust me, those things don’t fail unless something even more powerful than them makes them fail ( intentionally or not ). Think of it like a stray bullet. You can be hit by one at any time, without warning, and even the shooter did ‘not’ intend to hit you.

I can assure you heads are rolling over this as well.

If anyone notices a brilliant but sloppy ‘physicist’ patrolling the streets of Baghdad [ Iraq ] in the next couple weeks, I’d be willing to guess how he got there. ( I kid – of course – as I certainly hope that has ‘not’ actually happened in this case ).

I would now like to explain how it is that I know this.

The CARET Program –

My story begins the same as it did for many of my co-workers, with graduate and post-graduate work at university in electrical engineering. And I had always been interested in computer science, which was a very new field at the time, and my interest piqued with my first exposure to a Tixo during grad school.

In the years following school I took a scenic route through the tech industry and worked for the kinds of companies you would expect, until I was offered a job at the United States Department of Defense [ DoD ] and things took a very different turn.

My time at the DoD [ United States Department of Defense ] was mostly uneventful but I was there for quite a while. I apparently proved myself to be reasonably intelligent and loyal.

By 1984 these qualities along with my technical background made me a likely candidate for a new program they were recruiting for called “CARET.”

Before I explain, what CARET was, I should back up a little.

By 1984, Silicon Valley had been a juggernaut of technology for decades. In the less than 40-years since the appearance of Shockley’s transistor, this part of the world had already produced a multi billion dollar computer industry and made technological strides that were unprecedented in other fields – from hypertext and online collaboration in 1968 to the Alto in 1973.

Private industry in Silicon Valley was responsible for some of the most incredible technological leaps in history and this fact did not go unnoticed by the US government and military.

I don’t claim to have any special knowledge about Roswell [ New Mexico, USA incident believed to be an extraterrestrial flying object ( UFO ) crash ] or any of the other alleged early UFO events, but I do know that whatever the exact origin, the ‘military’ was hard at work trying to understand and use the ‘extraterrestrial artifacts’ it had in its ‘possession’.

While there had been a great deal of progress overall, things were not moving as quickly as some would have liked.

So, in 1984, the CARET program was created with the aim of harnessing the abilities of private industry in silicon valley and applying it to the ongoing task of understanding extra-terrestrial technology.

One of the best examples of the power of the tech sector was XEROX PARC, a research center in Palo Alto, California [ USA ].

XPARC was responsible for some of the major milestones in the history of computing.

While I never had the privilege of working there [ XEROX PARC ( Palo Alto, California, USA ], myself, I ‘did’ know many of the people who ‘did’ and I can say that they were among the brightest engineers I ever knew.

XPARC served as one [ 1 ] of the models for the CARET program’s first incarnation, a facility called the PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( PACL ) – lovingly pronounced, “packle” during my time there.

This [ Palo Alto CARET Laboratory ] was where [ Palo Alto, California, USA ] I worked, along with numerous other civilians, under the auspices of military brass who were eager to find out how the tech sector made so much progress so quickly.

My time at the DoD [ U.S. Department Of Defense ] was a major factor behind why I was chosen, and in fact about 30+ [ 30 or more ] others – who were hired around the same time – had also been at the Department [ U.S. Department Of Defense ] about as long but this was not the case for everyone.

A couple of my co-workers were plucked right from places like IBM [ INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES ] and, at least two [ 2 ] of them came from XPARC [ XEROX PARC ( Palo Alto, California, USA ] itself.

My DoD [ U.S. Department Of Defense ] experience did make me more eligable [ eligible ] for positions of management, however, which is how I have so much of this material [ documents, photos, etc. ] in my possession to begin with.

So, in other words, civilians ( like myself ) who had – at most – some decent experience working for the DoD [ U.S. Department Of Defense ] but no actual military training or involvement were suddenly finding ourselves in the same room as highly classified extra-terrestrial technology.

Of course they spent about 2-months briefing us all before we saw or did anything, and did their best to convince us that if we ever leaked a single detail about what we were being told, they’d do everything short of digging up our ancestors and putting a few slugs in them too – just for good measure.

It seemed like there was an armed guard in every corner of every room.

I’d [ I had ] worked under some pretty hefty NDAs [ National Defense Administrations ] in my time but this was so far out of my depth. I didn’t think I was going to last 2-weeks in an environment like that. But amazingly things got off to a good start.

They wanted us, plain and simple, and our industry – had shown itself to be so good at what it did – that they were just about ready to give us carte blanche.

Of course, nothing with the military is ever that simple, and as is often the case they wanted to have their cake and eat it too. What I mean by this is that despite their interest in picking our brains and learning whatever they could from our way of doing things, they still wanted to do it ‘their way’ often enough to frustrate us. At this point I’m going to gloss over the emotional side of this experience, because this letter isn’t intended to be a memoir, but I will say that there’s almost no way to describe the impact this kind of revelation has on your mind.

There are very few moments in life in which your entire world view is turned forever upside down, but this was one of them.

I still remember that turning point – during the briefing – when I realized what he’d just told us, and that I hadn’t heard him wrong, and that it wasn’t some kind of joke.

In retrospect, the whole thing feels like it was in slow motion, from that ‘slight pause’ he took – just before the term “extra-terrestrial” came out for the first time – to the way the room itself seemed to go off kilter as we collectively tried to grasp what was being said.

My reflex kept jumping back and forth between trying to look at the speaker, to understand him better, and looking at everyone else around me, to make sure I wasn’t the only one that was hearing this.

At the risk of sounding melodramatic, it’s a lot like a child learning his parents are divorcing. I never experienced that myself, but a very close friend of mine did when were boys, and he confided in me a great deal about what the experience felt like. A lot of what he said would aptly describe what I was feeling in that room.

Here was a ‘trusted authority figure’ telling you something that you just don’t feel ready for, and putting a burden on your mind that you don’t necessarily want to carry. The moment that first word comes out, all you can think about it is, what it was like only ‘seconds ago’, and knowing that life is never going to be as simple as it was ‘then’.

After all that time at the DoD [ U.S. Department Of Defense ], I thought I at least had some idea of what was going on in the world, but I’d never heard so much as a peep about this.

Maybe one day I’ll write more on this aspect, because it’s the kind of thing I really would like to get off my chest, but for now I’ll digress.

Unlike traditional research in this area, we weren’t working on new toys for the air force.

For numerous reasons, the CARET people decided to aim its efforts at ‘commercial applications’ rather than ‘military’ ones.

They basically wanted us to turn these ‘artifacts’ into something they could ‘patent’ and ‘sell’.

One of CARET’s most ‘appealing promises’ was the revenue generated by these product-ready technologies, which could be funneled right back into ‘black projects’. Working with a ‘commercial application’ in-mind was also yet another way to keep us in a familiar mind state. Developing technology for the military is very different than doing so for the ‘commercial sector’, and not having to worry about the difference was another way that CARET was very much ‘like private industry’.

CARET shined, in the way it let us work the way we were used to working. They wanted to recreate as much of the environment we were used to as they could without compromising issues like security. That meant we got ‘free reign to set up’ our own ‘workflow’, ‘internal management structure’, ‘style manuals’, ‘documentation’, and the like. They wanted this to look and ‘feel like private industry’, ‘not the military’. They ‘knew’ this was ‘how to get the best work out of us’, and they were right.

But things didn’t go as smoothly when it came to matters like access to classified information.

They were exposing what is probably their single biggest secret to a group of people who had never even been through basic training and it was obvious that the gravity of this decision was never far from their minds.

We started the program with a small set of ‘extra-terrestrial artifacts’ along with ‘fairly elaborate briefings’ on ‘each’ as well as ‘access to a modest amount of what research had already been completed’.

It wasn’t long before we realized ‘we needed more’ though, and getting them to provide even the smallest amount of new material was like pulling teeth.

CARET stood for “Commercial Applications Research for Extra-Terrestrial Technology”, but we often joked that it should have stood for “Civilians Are Rarely Ever Trusted.”

PACL [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ] was located in Palo Alto [ California, USA ], but unlike XPARC [ XEROX XPARC ( Palo Alto, California, USA ], it wasn’t at the end of a long road in the middle of a big complex surrounded by rolling hills and trees.

PACL was hidden in an ‘office complex’ – owned entirely by the military but ‘made to look like an unassuming tech company’.

From the street, all you could see was what appeared to be a normal ‘parking lot’ with a ‘gate’ and a ‘guard [ security ] booth’, and a 1-story building inside with a ‘fictitious name’ and ‘[ fictitious ] logo’.

What was ‘not visible’ – from the street – was that ‘behind’ the very ‘first set of doors’ was enough ‘armed guards’ to invade Poland, plus five [ 5 ] additional underground stories [ levels ].

They wanted to be as close as possible to the kinds of people they were looking to hire, and be able to bring them in with a minimum of fuss.

Inside, we had everything we needed. State of the art hardware and a staff of over 200 computer scientists, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, physicists and mathematicians.

Most of us were civilians, as I’ve said, but some were military, a few of them had been working on this technology already.

Of course, you were never far from the barrel of a ‘machine gun’ – even ‘inside the labs’ themselves ( something many of us never got used to ) – and ‘bi-weekly tours’ were made by ‘military brass’ to ensure that not a single detail was out of line. Most of us underwent extensive searches on our way into and out of the building. There it was, probably the biggest secret in the world, in a bunch of parts spread out on laboratory tables in the middle of Palo Alto so you can imagine their concern.

One ‘downside’ to CARET was that it was ‘not’ as ‘well-connected’ as ‘other operations’ undoubtedly ‘were’.

I ‘never got to see’ any ‘actual extra-terrestrials’ ( not even photos ), and in fact ‘never even saw’ one [ 1 ] of their ‘complete vehicles’ – ’99% of what I saw’ was ‘related to the work at-hand’, all of which was conducted within a very narrow context on ‘individual artifacts only’. The remaining ’1% came from people’ I met through the program, many of which ‘working more closely’ with “the good stuff” or ‘had [ worked with ] in the past’.

In fact, what was especially amusing about the whole affair was the way that our ‘military management’ almost ‘tried to act’ as if the ‘technology’ – we were essentially ‘reverse engineering’ – was ‘not extra-terrestrial’ at all.

Aside from the word “extra-terrestrial,” itself, we rarely heard any other terms like “alien” or “UFO” or “outer space” or anything. ‘Those aspects’ were ‘only mentioned briefly’ when absolutely ‘necessary to explain something’.

In many cases it was necessary to ‘differentiate’ between the different ‘races’ and ‘their’ respective ‘technology’, and they did ‘not’ even use the word “races.” They were referred to simply as different “sources.”

The Technology –

A lot of the technology we worked on was what you would expect, namely ‘anti-gravity’. Most of the ‘researchers’ ( on the staff ) – with ‘backgrounds’ in ‘propulsion’ and ‘rocketry’ – were ‘military’ men, but the ‘technology’ we were dealing with was so ‘out of this world’ that it didn’t really matter all that much what your background was because none of it applied.

All we could hope to do was use the ‘vocabulary’ of our respective fields as a way ‘to model’ the extremely bizarre ‘new concepts’ we were very slowly ‘beginning to understand’ as best we could.

A ‘rocket engineer’ doesn’t usually rub elbows much with a ‘computer scientist’, but inside PACL [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ], we were all ‘equally mystified’ and were ready to ‘entertain any and all ideas’.

The ‘physicists’ made the most headway, initially because out of all of our skills, their’s ‘overlapped the most’ with the ‘concepts behind this technology’ ( although that isn’t saying much! ). Once they [ physicists ] got the ball rolling though, we began to find that many of the ‘concepts found in computer science’ were applicable as well, albeit in very vague ways.

While I didn’t do a lot of work with the antigrav [ anti-gravity ] ‘hardware’, myself, I was occasionally involved in the ‘assessment’ of ‘how’ that ‘technology’ was meant to ‘interface’ with its ‘user’.

The antigrav [ anti-gravity ] was amazing, of course, as were the ‘advances’ we were making with ‘materials engineering’ and so on.

But what interested me most then, and still amazes me most to this day, was something completely unrelated.

In fact, it was this ‘technology’ that immediately jumped out at me when I ‘saw’ the Chad and Rajman ‘photos’, and even more-so in the ‘Big Basin photos’.

The “Language” –

I put the word Language in quotes because calling what I am about to describe a “language” is a misnomer, although it is an easy mistake to make.

Their [ extraterrestrial ] ‘hardware’ was ‘not’ operated in quite the same way as ours.

In our technology, even today, we have a combination of ‘hardware and software’ running almost everything on the planet.

Software is more abstract than hardware, but ultimately it needs hardware to run it.

In other words, there’s no way to write a computer program on a piece of paper, set that piece of paper on a table or something, and expect it to actually do something.

The most powerful ‘code’ in the world still ‘does not actually do anything’ until a piece of ‘hardware interprets it [ software ]‘ and ‘translates’ its ‘commands’ into ‘actions’.

But ‘their [ extraterestrial ] technology’ is ‘different’.

It really did operate like the magical piece of paper sitting on a table, in a manner of speaking.

They had something akin to a ‘language’ that could quite literally ‘execute’ itself – at least in the ‘presence’ of a very specific type of ‘field’ [ ‘field presence execution’ ].

The ‘language’, a term I am still using very loosely, is a ‘system’ of ‘symbols’ ( which does admittedly very much resemble a written language ) along with ‘geometric forms’ and ‘[ geometric ] patterns’ that fit together [ ‘interlocking’ ] to ‘form diagrams’ that are themselves ‘functional’.

Once they [ interlocking symbolic format diagrams ] are ‘drawn’ – so to speak – on a suitable ‘surface’ made of a suitable ‘material’ and in the ‘presence’ of a certain type of ‘field’, they immediately begin performing the desired tasks. It really did seem like magic to us, even after we began to understand the principles behind it.

I worked with these ‘symbols’ – more than anything [ else ] – during my time at PACL [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ], and ‘recognized them’ the moment I saw them in the ‘photos’.

They appear in a very simple ‘form’ on Chad’s ‘craft’, but appear in the ‘more complex diagram form’ on the ‘underside’ of the ‘Big Basin craft’ as well.

Both are unmistakable, even at the small size of the Big Basin photos.

An example of a diagram in the style of the Big Basin craft is included with this in a series of scanned pages from the [ mistitled ] “Linguistic Analysis Primer”.

We needed a copy of that diagram to be utterly precise, and it took about a [ one – 1 ] month [ 30-days ] for a team of six [ 6 ] to ‘copy’ that ‘diagram’ into our drafting program!

Explaining everything I learned about this technology would fill up several volumes, but I will do my best to explain at least ‘some’ of the ‘concepts’ – as long as I am taking the time to write all this down.

First of all, you wouldn’t open-up their [ extraterrestrial ] ‘hardware’ to find a CPU here, and a data bus there, and some kind of memory over there.

Their [ extraterrestrial ] ‘hardware’ appeared to be ‘perfectly solid’, and consistent, in terms of ‘material’ – from one side to the other. Like a rock or a hunk of metal.

But upon [ much ] closer inspection, we began to learn that it was actually one [ 1 ] big ‘holographic computational substrate’ – each “computational element” ( essentially, individual ‘particles’ ) can ‘function independently’ but are ‘designed to function together’ in tremendously ‘large clusters’.

I say its ‘holographic’ because you can ‘divide it up into the smallest chunks’ you want and still find a scaled-down but complete representation of the whole system.

They produce a ‘non-linear computational output’ when ‘grouped’.

So four [ 4 ] elements, working together, is actually more than four [ 4 ] times ‘more powerful than’ one [ 1 ].

Most of the internal “matter” in their [ extraterrestrial ] ‘crafts’, usually everything – except the outermost housing – is actually ‘this [ extraterestrial] substrate’ and can ‘contribute to computation’ at ‘any time’ and in ‘any state’.

The ‘shape’ of these [ extraterrestrial ] “chunks” of ‘substrate’ also had a profound ‘effect’ on its [ extraterrestrial ] ‘functionality’, and often served as a “shortcut” to achieve a goal that might ‘otherwise’ be more ‘complex’.

So back to the language.

The language is actually a “functional blueprint.”

The ‘forms’ of the ‘shapes’, ‘symbols’ and ‘arrangements’ thereof is itself ‘functional’.

What makes it all especially ‘difficult to grasp’ is that every ‘element’ of each “diagram” is ‘dependant on’ and ‘related to’ every ‘other element’ [ elements ], which means ‘no single detail’ can be ‘created’, ‘removed’ or ‘modified’ independently.

Humans like written language because each element of the language can be understood on its own, and from this, complex expressions can be built.

However, their “language” is entirely ‘context sensitive’, which means that ‘a given symbol’ could mean as little as a ’1-bit flag’ in ‘one [ 1 ] context’, or – quite literally – contain the entire human genome or a galaxy star map in another.

The ability for a single, small symbol to contain, not just represent, tremendous amounts of data is another counter-intuitive aspect of this ‘concept’.

We quickly realized that even ‘working in groups’ of ten [ 10 ] or more on the ‘simplest of diagrams’, we found it virtually impossible to get anything done. As each new feature was added, the ‘complexity of the diagram exponentially grew’ to unmanageable proportions.

For this reason we began to develop computer-based systems to manage these details and achieved some success, although again we found that a threshold was quickly reached beyond which even the supercomputers of the day were unable to keep up.

Word was that the ‘extraterrestrials could design’ these ‘diagrams’ as ‘quickly’, and [ as ] easily as a human programmer could write a [ computer language ] Fortran program.

It’s humbling to think that even a ‘network of supercomputers’ was ‘not’ able to ‘duplicate’ what they could do in their [ extraterrestrial ] own heads.

Our entire system of language is based on the idea of assigning meaning to symbols.

Their [ extraterrestrial ] technology, however, somehow ‘merges’ the ‘symbol’ and the ‘meaning’, so a subjective audience is not needed.

You can put whatever meaning you want on the symbols, but their behavior and functionality will not change, any more than a transistor will function differently if you give it another name.

Here’s an example of how complex the process is.

Imagine I ask you to incrementally add random words to a list such that no two [ 2 ] words use any of the same letters, and you must perform this exercise entirely in your head, so you can’t rely on a computer or even a pen and paper.

If the first [ 1st ] in the list was, say, “fox”, the second [ 2nd ] item excludes all words with the letters F, O and X.

If the next word you choose is “tree”, then the third [ 3rd ] word in the list can’t have the letters F, O, X, T, R, or E in it.

As you can imagine, coming up with even a third [ 3rd ] word might start to get just a bit tricky, especially since you can’t easily visualize the excluded letters by writing down the words.

By the time you get to the fourth [ 4th ], fifth [ 5th ] and sixth [ 6th ] words, the problem has spiraled out of control.

Now imagine trying to add the billionth [ 1,000,000,000 ] word to the list ( imagine also that we’re working with an ‘infinite alphabet’ so you don’t run out of letters ) and you can imagine how difficult it is for even a computer to keep up.

Needless to say, writing this kind of thing “by hand” is orders of magnitude beyond the capabilities of the brain.

My background lent itself well to this kind of work though. I’d spent years ‘writing code’ and ‘designing’ both ‘analog’ and ‘digital’ circuits, a process that at least visually resembled these diagrams in some way.

I also had a personal affinity for ‘combinatorics’, which served me well as I helped with the ‘design of software’ running on ‘supercomputers’ that could juggle the often trillions [ 1,000,000,000,000 ] of rules necessary to create a ‘valid diagram’ of any ‘reasonable complexity’.

This overlapped quite a bit with ‘compiler theory’ as well, a subject I always found fascinating, and in particular ‘compiler optimization’, a field that was ‘not’ half [ 50% ] of what it is today back then.

A running joke among the linguistics team was that Big-O notation couldn’t adequately describe the scale of the task, so we’d substitute other words for “big”.

By the time I left I remember the consensus was “Astronomical-O” finally did it justice.

Like I said, I could go on for hours about this subject, and would love to write at least an introductory book on the subject if it was not – still completely – ‘classified’, but that’s not the point of this letter so I’ll try to get back on track.

The last thing I’d like to discuss is how I got copies of this material, what else I have in my possession, and what I plan to do with it in the future.

My Collection –

I worked at PACL [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] from 1984 to 1987, by which time I was utterly burned out.

The sheer volume of details to keep in mind while working with the diagrams was enough to challenge anyone’s sanity, and I was really at the end of my rope with the military attitude towards our “need to know”. Our ability to get work done was constantly hampered by their reluctance to provide us with the necessary information, and I was tired of bureaucracy getting in the way of research and development [ R&D ].

I left somewhere in the middle of a 3-month bell curve in which about a quarter of the entire PACL [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] staff left for similar reasons.

I was also starting to disagree with the direction the leadership wanted to take as far as the subject of extra-terrestrials went.

I always felt that at least some form of disclosure would be beneficial, but as a lowly CARET ‘engineer’ I wasn’t exactly in the position to call shots.

The truth is, our management didn’t even want us discussing – even among ourselves – non-technical aspects of this subject ( such as ethical or philosophical issues, as they felt it was enough of a breach of security to let civilians like us anywhere near this kind of thing in the first place.

So, about 3-months before I resigned ( which was about 8-months before I was really out – since you don’t just walk out of a job like that with a 2-week notice ) – I decided to start taking advantage [ remove PACL work documents, etc. ] of my ‘position’ [ a ‘situational position’ wherein his ( Issac ) PACL ‘security inspections’ on his ( Issac ) ‘person’ became lessened or ‘weak’ upon his ( Issac ) ‘departures from the PACL facility’ ].

As I mentioned earlier, my DoD [ United States Department Of Defense ] experience got me into an internal management role sooner than some of my colleagues, and after about a [ one – 1 ] year of that kind of status, the outgoing [ departing ] searches [ security inspections ] each night became slightly less rigorous.

Normally, we were to empty out any containers, bags or briefcases, then remove our shirt and shoes and submit to a kind of frisking. Work was never allowed to go home with you, no matter who you were.

For me, though, the briefcase search [ secuity inspection ] was [ had become ] eventually enough [ all that the security inspection became on him ( Issac ) ].

Even before I [ Issac ] actually decided to do it [ remove PACL work documents, etc. ], I was sure that I would be able to sneak certain materials out with me.

I wanted to do this [ remove PACL work documents, photos, etc. ] because I knew the day would come when I would want to write something like this, and I knew I’d regret it until the day I died if I didn’t at least leave the possibility open to do so.

So I started photocopying [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] documents and reports by the dozen.

I had then [ 3-months before he ( Issac ) resigned from PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] put the papers [ documents, etc. ] under my shirt around my lower back, tucked enough into my belt to ensure they wouldn’t fall out.

I could do this [ ‘physically able to do’ but ‘not authorized to do’ ] in any one of a few ‘short windowless hallways’ on some of the ‘lower floors’, which were among the few places that did ‘not’ have an ‘armed guard watching’ my every move.

I would walk in one end [ of the ‘short windowless hallways’ ] with a stack of papers large enough that when I came out the other end [ of the ‘short windowless hallways’ ] with some of them [ documents, photos, etc. ] in my shirt – there would ‘not’ be a visible [ observational ] difference in what I was holding.

You absolutely cannot be too careful if you’re going to pull a stunt like this.

As long as I walked carefully they would ‘not’ make a crinkling noise [ paper flex rustling upon movement ].

In fact, the more papers I took, the less noise they made, since they were ‘not’ as flimsy [ resistant to flex upon restricted movement ] that way.

I’d often take upwards of 10-pages up to 20-pages at once [ each time ].

By the time I was done, I had made out with [ unlawfully removed documents, photos, etc. away from PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] ‘hundreds’ [ 200+ or more ] of ‘photocopies’, as well as a few ‘originals’ and a ‘large collection’ of ‘original photographs’.

With this ‘initial letter’, I have attached high resolution scans of the following:

– One [ 1 ] page is from a [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] “inventory review” with a ‘photo’ – appears to depict one ( 1 ) of the ‘parts’ found in the Rajman sighting and ‘parts’ very similar to the Big Basin craft;

– The first [ 1st ] nine ( 9 ) pages of one ( 1 ) of our [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] ‘quarterly’ research ‘reports’;

– Scans of the ‘original photographs’ used ‘in that report’ – since the ‘photocopies obscure’ most of the ‘details’; and

– Five [ 5 ] pages from a ‘report’ on our [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] ongoing analysis of the “language” ( inappropriately titled “linguistic analysis” ) depicting the kind of diagram – just barely visible on the underside of the Big Basin craft.

This material is the most, ‘relevant’ and ‘explanatory’, I could find on ‘short notice’.

Now that these are up [ on the internet ], ‘if’ I decide to release more in the future, I’ll be able to take my time and better search this rather large collection of mine that I’ve sadly never organized.

I’m not sure what I’ll be doing with the rest of the collection in the future.

I suppose I’ll wait and see how this all plays out, and then play it by ear.

There are certainly risks involved in what I’m doing, and if I were to actually be identified and caught, there could be rather serious consequences.

However, I’ve taken the proper steps to ensure a ‘reasonable level of anonymity’ and am quite secure in the fact that the information I’ve so far provided is by ‘no means unique’ among many of the CARET participants [ had access to ].

Besides, part of me has always suspected that the [ United States of America ] government ‘relies on the occasional leak’ – like this – and actually wants them to happen, because it ‘contributes to a steady slow-paced path towards revealing’ the ‘truth’ of this ‘matter’.

Since Leaving CARET –

Like I said, I left PACL in 1987, but have kept in touch with a great many of my friends and co-workers from those days.

Most of us are retired by now, except – of course – for those of us that went-on to get ‘teaching jobs’, but a few of us ‘still hear things’ [ ‘still told of these matters’ ] through the grapevine.

As for CARET itself, I’m not sure what’s become of it.

Whether it’s still known by the same name, I’m quite sure it’s ‘still active’ in ‘some capacity’, although who knows where.

I heard from a number of people that PACL [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] closed up shop a few years after I left, but I’ve still yet to get a clear answer on why exactly that happened.

But I’m sure ‘the kind of work we did there’ [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] is ‘still going’ strong.

I’ve heard from a lot of friends that there are multiple sites like PACL in Sunnyvale, California ( USA ) and Mountain View, California ( USA ) also disguised to look like ‘unremarkable office space’.

But this is all second-hand information so you can make of it what you will.

Around 2002, or so, I came across Coast to Coast AM [ radio station in the United States of America ] and have been hooked ever since.

I admit, I don’t take most of the [ radio program ] show’s content as anything more than entertainment, but there have been occasions when I could be sure a guest was clearly speaking from experience or a well-informed source.

For me, there’s just something very ‘surreal about hearing all this speculation’ and ‘so-called inside information’ about UFOs [ Unidentified Flying Objects ] ( and the like ) but [ my ( Issac ) ] being ‘personally able to verify’ at least ‘some of it’ as being true or false. It’s [ Coast to Coast AM radio program ( USA ) ] also a ‘nightly’ [ time period, when Coast to Coast AM radio is broadcasted ] reminder of how hectic things were in those days, which helps me enjoy my retirement all the more.

Knowing I’m not part of that crazy world anymore really is something I enjoy on a daily basis, as much as I miss some of it.

Conclusion –

What I’ve shared so far is only a very small portion of what I have, and what I know.

Despite the very sheltered and insulated atmosphere within CARET, I did ultimately learn a great deal from various colleagues, and some of what I learned is truly incredible.

I’d also like to say that for what it’s worth, during my time [ 1983 – 1987 ] there [ PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY ( Palo Alto, California, USA ) ] I never heard anything about invasions, or abductions, or many of the more frightening topics that often pop up on Coast to Coast AM [ radio program ( USA ) ].

That’s not to say that none of it is true, but in my time working alongside some of the most well-connected people in this field, it never came up.

So at the very least I can say my intent is not to scare anyone.

My view on the extra-terrestrial situation is very much a positive, albiet still highly secretive one.

One thing I can definitely say is that if they wanted us gone, we would have been gone a very, very long time ago, and we wouldn’t even have seen it coming.

Throw out your ideas about a space war or anything silly like that. We’d be capable of fighting back against them about as much as ants could fight back against a stampede of buffalo.

But that’s okay, we are the ‘primitive race’, they [ extraterrestrials ] are the ‘advanced races’, and that’s just the way it is.

The ‘other advanced races let them live through their primitive years’ back in ‘their day’, and there is no reason to think it will be any different for us.

They [ extraterrestrials ] are not in the market for a new planet, and even if they [ extraterrestrials ] were there are way too many planets out there for them [ extraterrestrials ] to care about ours enough to take it by force.

To reiterate my take on the recent sightings, I would guess that experimentation – done in the last couple months – on a device that, among other things, is capable of interfering with various crafts onboard invisibility has resulted in a sudden wave of sightings.

It may ‘not’ explain ‘all’ of the recent events, but like I said, I’d bet my life that ‘is’ exactly what happened at Big Basin – at least – and it’s probably related in some way to the Chad, Rajman and Tahoe [ Lake Tahoe, California / Nevada ( USA ) ] sightings [ of the unidentified flying object ( UFO ) ].

So, despite all the recent fanfare over this, I’d say this does ‘not’ mean much.

Most importantly, they are ‘not suddenly’ “here,” they [ extraterrestrials ] have been here for a long time, but just [ have ] happened to turn ‘intentionally visible’ for brief periods ‘recently’.

Lastly, there are so many people selling books, and DVDs, and doing lectures and all that so, I would like to reiterate the fact that I am ‘not’ here to ‘sell’ anything.

The material I’m sharing is ‘free to distribute’ provided it’s all kept intact and unmodified, and this letter is included.

I tend to question the motives of anyone charging money for their information, and will assure you that I [ Issac ] will never do such a thing.

And in the future, just to cover all the bases, anyone claiming to be ‘me’ [ Issac ] who ‘is’ selling a DVD or book is most certainly ‘not going to be me’ [ Issac ].

Any future releases from me [ Issac ] will come from the e-mail address I’ve used to contact Coast to Coast AM [ USA radio station ], and will be sent to them [ Coast to Coast AM ( USA radio station ) ] only.

I’d like to make this clear as well to ensure that people can be sure that any future information comes from the same source, although I must be clear:

At this time I do not have any future plans for additional information. Time will tell how long I will maintain this policy, but do not expect anything soon.

I’d really like to let this information “settle” for a while and see how it goes.

If I find out I’m getting an IRS [ United States Department of the Treasury, Office of Internal Revenue Service ( IRS ) ] audit tomorrow, then maybe this wasn’t too smart.

Until then, I’m going to take it slow.

I hope this information has been helpful.

– Issac

– –

One of the documents ( in the form of high resolution scans of the original ) uploaded was called “PALO ALTO CARET LABORATORY Q-4 1986 RESEARCH REPORT” – here are some excerpts:

1. OVERVIEW –

This document is intended as a primer for the tentative findings of the Q4 1986 research phase ( referred to herein as “Q-4 1986″ ) at the Palo Alto CARET Laboratory (aka) PACL. In accordance with the CARET program mission statement, the goal of this research has been achieving a greater understanding of extraterrestrial technology within the context of commercial applications and civilian use. Examples of such applications, in no particular order, include transportation, medicine, construction, energy, computing and communication.

The ultimate goal of this research is to provide a core set of advanced technologies in a condition suitable for patent review.

2. EXTRACTION –

The process of converting raw artifacts of extraterrestrial origin to usable, fully-documented human technology is termed extraction. The extraction process ultimately consists of two phases:

First [ 1st ] is the establishment of a complete theoretical and operational understanding of the artifact; and,

Second [ 2nd ] is a distillation of the artifact’s underlying principles into usable, product-oriented technology.

Suggestions of specific product applications on behalf of PACL have been encouraged, but are not considered mandatory or essential.

– –

From: Isaac Subject: Re: “Drones” Date: June 27, 2007

Isaac:

“There are a few misconceptions that I have noticed so far and would like to clear them up, and will also answer your questions:

1) I realize now that I did not make this clear, but I should clarify that I am not responsible for the blacking out of the Q4-86 report. Most of the copies I was able to make came from documents that were already archived, which meant that they had already been censored for use by outside parties that needed access to some, but not all, of CARET’s information. I’m trying to share this information, not hide it, but if I did feel that if a given topic was too sensitive for some reason, I would make it clear that I had personally covered it up and probably try to give a reason why.

2) I do not understand the question about why the diagram would be “formatted for 8.5 x 11″… As I mention in my letter, the diagram is a reproduction, not the original. We had a team of technical artists painstakingly copy the diagram from its original source, which was a slightly curved panel not unlike the one seen in the Big Basin craft, although this one was apparently inside the craft, not on the outside. We copied it into a drafting program over the course of about a month.

Our software was understandably primitive by today’s standards, but it was still orders of magnitude more powerful than a pencil and paper would have been. This made a task that would have otherwise been nearly impossible relatively feasible, albeit extremely time-consuming. I can assure you, “they” did not make anything particularly convenient for us. One of the reasons we chose to reproduce that particular diagram was because out of all the diagram-artifacts we had access to, it was on the flattest surface.

Since the geometry of the forms is extremely important, curvature of the surface it’s printed on must be “corrected” if it is to be reproduced in a surface with a different contour (such as a flat page). This can be done in a number of ways, by either using a mathematical model to reverse the effect of the surface curves on the diagram’s shapes, or by methods of physical measuring that allow precise measuring of irregular surfaces. In either case, however, it adds a significant new dimension of labor to an already extremely labor-intensive task, so it’s avoided whenever possible. We really just needed one or two accurately copied diagrams to serve as convenient examples for our own work in decoding and reproducing it, so luckily this was not something we had to do often. Some experimentation was being done on ways to “scan” the diagrams as well, using an almost completely automated process that could automatically account for curved surfaces, but during my time there, very little progress was made on this front.

3) I think the confusion over the quality of the documents stems from the fact that he (critic) is under the impression they (CARET document) were typeset. They were not. First of all, I’m no guru when it comes to graphics or design, but being in close contact with numerous people from places like XPARC will give you enough background to know the lay of the land. What’s first important to note is that systems capable of desktop publishing had been in development for many years before CARET, mostly starting with the Xerox Alto (in 1973), which XPARC developed themselves.

In fact, I once remember hearing from someone related to the original Alto team that Boeing (I believe) used the Alto to lay out and print the documentation for one of their planes (or something to that effect, I heard the story years ago). The joke was apparently that there was so MUCH documentation that the plane itself could essentially be filled with the pages. Furthermore, laser printing itself had also been around for many years (albeit in an extremely expensive form), and was also developed within XPARC (more or less). Other systems, such as PERQ and Lilith, also came out around the late 70′s and while none of them turned into major commercial products, they were not uncommon among large companies and [mostly] universities and were put to very productive use.

These systems were also the inspiration for the Apple Lisa and Macintosh, which was of course perhaps the biggest factor in the consumer-level desktop publishing boom of the late 80′s and early 90′s. By 1984, there were quite a few options available for producing these kinds of documents, they were just ABSURDLY expensive, so they weren’t on every street corner. Obviously it was nowhere near as turnkey and simple as it is today, but it was a very crude approximation of the same process with similar tools. We just had far less features and everything was a hell of a lot slower. But the point I’m trying to make is that while our method of documentation was somewhat advanced for its time, and also somewhat uncommon, it was hardly unattainable by a sufficiently motivated, financed, and well-connected organization.

I had very little contact with the technical writers for the most part, but I do know that we were using this kind of technology for both page layout and printing. CARET was expected to produce a massive amount of detailed, well-formatted documentation that could be easily modified and re-used for numerous drafts and revisions, and we would not have been able to keep up using traditional page layout and typesetting techniques. The mid-1980′s were a very transitional period for these fields, and I would suggest that people do not assume we were using run-of-the-mill standards.

One of the things I appreciated most about CARET was that if the technology was available, and we needed it to work better or more effectively, it was given to us with little debate. But typesetting and digital page layout are apples and oranges, so I think most of this is a moot point anyway.

The bottom line is that many people both inside and outside the engineering world frequently underestimate how long we’ve had a lot of the technology we have. 99% of the algorithms we use today were developed decades ago, they just didn’t have the same practical applications immediately available. Most of the engineers of the 60′s and 70′s would have been right at home with today’s developments and technologies. The only difference is that things have gotten smaller and faster. In the vast majority of technologies, that is the only thing that REALLY changes from one era to the next. If I told the average person that we had speech-synthesizing technology in 1936, they probably wouldn’t believe me.

I could show you a prototype of a simple drafting/design system that was operated by a light pen directly on a screen from the 1960′s. You could draw a shape freehand, then immediately rotate it, modify it, duplicate it, or whatever. You could draw lines connecting different objects, then erase them by simply drawing a squiggly line over it. The computer could interpret the squiggles as a sign to erase something, all in real time. And this was half a century ago, and decades before CARET. Think about that for a moment. The point is, most of what we have today is much older than we think. The only differences are that it’s faster, cheaper, and a marketing team has given it a glossy finish and found a commercial application for it. But if you take away some of the speed, power, ubiquity and consumer appeal, you’ll find a lot of today’s technology scattered throughout much of the 20th century. I hope this is helpful.

Isaac”

– –

From: Isaac Subject: Re: “Drones” Date: June 27, 2007

Isaac:

“1) While I wasn’t a major player in the (CARET) organization, I was hardly ‘some worker.’ My middle-management position is the only reason I was able to make out with what I did. Bear in mind that even someone in my position would never get the chance to leave with even the smallest of actual artifacts, but paperwork smuggling was feasible for anyone who wasn’t subjected to the frisking.

Also, let’s not forget that paperwork only proves so much. I’ll be the first to agree that everything I’ve provided could be faked, I suppose. It is, after all, just a series of images. While the powers that be obviously don’t want this material leaking if they can help it, they’re certainly aware that scans of documents aren’t in the same league as UFOs landing on the White House lawn. I’m not the first person to leak a document or a photo, and I won’t be the last. The information I’ve shared is very unlikely to change the world, and this is the reason I’m not worried about being literally murdered if I’m identified. I’ll face consequences to be sure, but it’s not the kind of thing they kill for.

2) Of course the manual doesn’t look anything like typical government and military documents. The entire purpose of CARET was to recreate the look and feel of silicon valley private enterprise, populate it with private industry engineers, and let it tackle the problem of extraterrestrial technology research. Style manuals were among the numerous things we brought with us from the ‘outside world.’ I’m not sure what else can be said about this. I agree it’s uncommon for non-standard documents to come out of this kind of research, but it’s even more uncommon for people like myself (and even more so for many of my co-workers) to be brought into this kind of project in the first place. Most of us were decidedly not military men. I find it a lot more bizarre than the fact that we were able to design our reports a certain way. CARET was an exception to many of the usual rules.

3) If he (one of many critics who emailed Earthfiles and which I shared with Isaac) believes the pictures are fake, I certainly can’t do or say anything to prove otherwise. He sounds very sure of himself.

4) Most importantly, be very wary of anyone who claims to ‘know the mind’ of extraterrestrials. The comments he’s made are, to put it lightly, naive and extremely presumptuous. Firstly, he’s referring to ‘the aliens’ as if there is a single collective group of them. The universe is not split into ‘humans’ and ‘non-humans,’ any more than Earth is split up into ‘Spanish’ and ‘non-Spanish’ or something equally arbitrary. There are numerous races – and again, like our own races of humans here on earth, they do things in very different ways.

His comment that ‘the aliens don’t do this or that’ is akin to saying ‘humans don’t speak Japanese.’ Well, many humans don’t, but Japanese humans certainly do. The point is not that his statement is right or wrong, but simply that it’s phrased illogically. He then goes on to suggest that the design of the drones is wasting space, which is again, alarming in its arrogance. We had some of the brightest minds in the world spending years just to understand a single facet of their technology, while this individual claims to be able to assess basically every detail of a given design after looking at a single photo and conclude that it’s inefficient. I’m not even sure such a statement should be dignified with a response, and I’m sure you can understand why.

To be honest, whoever this person is, I wrote him off as soon as he said ‘the aliens would never design as these pictures depict.’ That’s about as presumptuous (if not ignorant) as a statement on this subject can be, at least coming from a fellow human. Unless there’s an alien engineer on the other side of this email, there’s simply no way such statements could have merit. I’m really only writing this as a courtesy to you.

At best, he’s been exposed to technology from a radically different race, and at worst, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. This individual may have access to real information, and he might not. If he is a fellow ‘whistle blower,’ then I’m not interested in attacking him. If he’s not, and is simply making things up, then I’m even less interested. Whatever he is or isn’t is not for me to say, but judging by the way he talks about this issue I have my doubts.

It’s a big world and these are complicated issues. A sense of humility and the admission we don’t know everything is one of our greatest assets.

Isaac”

====

 

Submitted for review and commentary by,

 

Concept Activity Research Vault ( CARV ), Host
E-MAIL: ConceptActivityResearchVault@Gmail.Com
WWW: http://ConceptActivityResearchVault.WordPress.Com

 

Secret IT Directorate

CIA HQ former buildings

[ PHOTO ( above ): Former U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Headquarters ( click on image to greatly enlarge ) ]

Secret IT Directorate
by, Concept Activity Research Vault ( CARV )

November 22, 2011 11:45:08 ( PST ) Updated ( Originally Published: October 25, 2010 )

USA, Menlo Park, California – November 22, 2010 – Some may not recall the ‘first public announcement ( 2000 )’ of the United States Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) ‘private business corporation’ having been referred to as the IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION INTERFACE CENTER (aka) QIC, it was however fomerly known as IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION, but ‘that company name’ was even formerly known as IN-Q-IT CORPORATION (  ’not’ to be confused with the INTUIT CORPORATION business of software application programs QuickBooks and TurboTax ), however the CIA ’reversed’ its previous private business name change decisions back to it now being known as the IN-Q-IT CORPORATION ( IN-Q-IT ) today. Clear as mud, right?

Some wonder whether ”IN-Q-IT” is even ‘really’ the ’true name’ of this CIA ‘private business’ company today, or whether – within the intelligence community pea ‘n shell game of names – other company subsidiary names may have developed, but for now the IN-Q-IT CORPORATION is ‘currently known’ as being the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) ‘venture capital’ private business corporation.

Important to understand precisely ‘what this CIA private business was supposed to be accomplishing’ versus ‘what the CIA actually did’ with its private business; more recently, however ’what it has become’ and ‘what it is supposed to be accomplishing’ today and for the future.

The curious state of affairs sees no one knowing anything more about the CIA QIC ( IN-Q-TEL Interface Center ) private business corporation than a few did when it began, but ‘now’ no one is even required to inform the public with an accounting to justify anything surrounding it. Why? Because it was meant to be a ‘private business’ company, ‘not’ a U.S. government entity, and ‘that’ was ‘how’ the CIA created it to remain – outside anyone’s purview – for a rather ‘complex’ reason.

The only method, by which an ‘even more complete’ and ‘even more accurate assessment’ may be formulated for an ’even more thorough understanding’ is quite involved and may at times be highly complex. One must not only review ‘multiple facet areas’ this CIA ‘private business company was originally designed to tackle but more-so what it was supposed to accomplish, and from within ‘both’ of those areas, go on to ’realize precisely’ what ‘were’ and ‘still are’ today’s “problem sets” facing the CIA and just ‘how’ they are juggling it all.

Some believe ‘members’ of U.S. Congressional committees’ and subcommittees’ ‘oversight’ had to attend ‘special educational lessons’ designed by the CIA. Did key members of Congress attend what basically amounted to a CIA ‘school’?

The CIA Congressional school was believed non-existent by many left to see other less palatable theories develop into the U.S. Congress having simply tired over too numerous CIA complex oversight reviews – and so much so that Congress relagated its own authority over to CIA in what some believed tantamount to the CIA ‘fox’ guarding its own global-sized intelligence ‘chicken coop’.

Some may now be enlightened to understand what the United States Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) decidely phrased as its own ”radical departure” away-from what it perceived as ‘inefficient economic budget support’ for solving its own ’quantum complexities’ within ’highly specific areas’ – still ‘classified’ in the interest of ‘national security’ – burdensomely producing an exponential growth of new ”problem sets” the CIA would only publicly explain – in the most general of terms – as such ‘experienced from within un-named areas’ of ‘science and technology research and development applications’ that the CIA was decidely viewing to establish ‘limits upon’ and go on to a’simultaneously’ establish as ‘marketable derivatives’ it called ”products” that CIA Office of Science and Technology ( S&T ) oversight could ‘manage distribution of information knowledge’ from but on an ‘in-exchange’ contractual agreement basis with ‘cooperative’ “private sector” ‘individuals’, ‘businesses’,  ’institutions’ and ‘organizations’ and thereby ‘establish who held proprietary keys’ to ‘special skill sets’ of what was already protected ’intellectual property rights’ of “existing” technology and CIA global establishment over all ”emerging” ( new upcoming future ) technology proprietary rights by sole marketeering ‘special talents’ and ‘special services’ could be harvested where incredible amounts of ‘profit’ could also be harnessed ( absorbed ) by the CIA.

To many of entrepeneurial independent spirit this CIA QIC private business corporation appeared, in-essence, out-of nowhere, like a new Borg structure infringing on private freedoms of what few once experienced of global marketplace past, and to others CIA QIC tenor was too Godfather-like – making people and entities an offer they couldn’t refuse. While the CIA foresaw such rumors and speculation coming,  in reality, what ‘was’ the ‘CIA’ doing by opening-up ‘its own private business corporation’?

Visionary dreams may be able to see the United States Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) ‘shed’ its ’government skin’ to become the ‘world’s largest multi-national corporation’ holding the ‘world’s largest monopoly’ on information technology ( IT ) research and development direction of much of the world’s finest talent resources, i.e. private ‘individuals’, ‘businesses’, ‘institutions’ and ‘organizations’ independently operating outside U.S. Congress ‘oversight, budget justification and related constraints’. Such clever restructuring in-place, CIA would cease to exist as the public knows it today, technically – by legal definition – becoming a wholly-owned ’non-profit organization’ – no longer requiring U.S. Department of the Treasury tax dollar funding. Set free, a new type of CIA would exist with ‘self-determined financing’ and stock market trading profits derived from a host of private sector corporate ‘mergers and acquisitions’ ( M&A ).

While surface dreams of such visionaries might at-first appear ingenious ‘how’ was ‘all’ this ‘actually assembled’?

Before 1999, it took the CIA Office of Legal Counsel less than 1-year to research various United States laws to locate legacy technicality provisions that the U. S. Congress approved allowing the CIA to exercise its own ”radical departure” plan.

By 2000, ’reality’ saw the fetal stages of this CIA private bussiness venture plan developing, leaving the public without hearing anymore further about its progress.

Some believed an ‘initial public offering’ ( IPO ) paying dividends to private individual investors and corporate trading of shares of ‘stock’ in what could have been misconstrued as potentially being the world’s largest ‘insider trading scheme’ headache of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) whose predictives could only imagine manage the envelopment of multiple new technology area companies trading on ’stock exchange’ floors that could potentially carry forward ‘mutual profit secrets’ paying more funds than anticipated into the CIA private business plan – a “radical departure” away from what otherwise had long been understood as the status quo of world trading – where embarrassing implications might turn’terrorist fund reduction measures’ into ‘profits derived from CIA led secret private business developments in high technology products’. Could such a “radical departure” plan backfire or morphotherwise ’unsophisticated terrorists’ – utilizing improvised munition missions – into a new more powerful community of ’uncooperative competitive business terrorists’? Perhaps.

Implications of a CIA private business group of subsidiary businesses trading stock on ‘open stock market exchanges’ around the world could create an entirely ’new form of intelligence blowback’ of staggering global socio-economic business proportions for future generations.

Today, no overall clear pictures exist on what still remains cloaked in secrets – albeit ’government’ or ‘private’ – where outside both domains this CIA private business enterprise continues growing. But, in which directions?

Prior to 2001, the new CIA plan became a ’high-directional multi-tiered simulataneous growth-oriented economic support expansion’ for and of ‘key-critical secret-sensitive advanced “information technology” ( IT ) derivatives ( “products” )’ that could ‘only be implimented’ by the CIA “identifying” ( targeting ) and “partnering” ( obtaining ) ’exisiting information’ and ‘information tasking ability quotients’ from “global” ( worldwide ) “private sector” masses – an ”infinite” ( unlimited ) supply of ‘private individuals’, ‘private businesses’ and ‘institutions’ to become ‘dedicated taskers’ of controlled CIA “problem sets.”

The CIA private business futures would depend on successful simultaneous utilization of exercising better economic sense to its maximum potential immediately alongside highly specific advanced technological enhancements the United States ’intelligence community’ would be grown under a new ‘broad term secrecy’ commonly known but hidden within what the CIA termed only as ”information technology” ( IT ) that would necessarily require CIA controlled ’targeting’, ‘shaping’ and ‘acquisition’ of a plethora of private business sector information technology ( IT ) application research and development.

Truely a ”radical departure,” as the CIA publicly alluded to, when describing its ‘new mission focus’ – solving CIA “problem sets.”

Although CIA controlled ’special technology’ research and development ( R&D ) was on ‘applications’ that later becale known as ” Commercial Off The Shelf ” ( C.O.T.S. / COTS ) ‘products’ that were in-essence – during early stage informational development – the cruxt of what the CIA wanted presented on its ‘table’ whereupon the CIA would legitimatize and manage ‘mass information exchanges’ the CIA would ’trade’ for ‘other valuable considerations’ but to only a select few ‘private companies’ ( e.g. LOCKHEED, LUCENT, PHILIPS, AT&T, et al. ) that would in-return be ‘capable of offering’ through only ’United States government qualified’ contractual agreement exchanges of whatever the CIA deemed these companies ’could place of further interest’ or ’further the duration of continuing to provide’ what these select private ‘individuals’, ‘companies’, ‘institutions’ and ‘organizations’ were ‘already providing under U.S. government contract agreement harvests’.

The public, however only understood ‘press reports’ that kept all of the aforementioned very ’simple’ – indicating in the vaguest of terms – that ‘products would eventually be sold’ ”through the private sector.”

Secret-sensitive ‘products’, that were in all actuality ‘technological breakthroughs’ were to be traded between CIA selected and controlled business stock holdings, and the CIA IN-Q-TEL INTERFACE CENTER ( QIC ) would privately and thereby secretly manipulate all technology funds derived from what the CIA QIC publicly referred to as those being its ‘partners’ and ‘other vendors’ that would remain ’outside the purview U. S. Congress government budget oversight’ where all private companies remain to enjoy unfettered privledges of privacy.

By utilizing U.S. Department of the Treasury government tax funds – for U.S. government contract agreement funding to ‘private business partners’ – the United States Federal Reserve System follows in CIA footpath lock-step by ’mirroring’ private bank wire transfer monies directed and then redirected through a long chain series of foreign corporation named offshore bank accounts secretly routed back into the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) IN-Q-IT CORPORATION (aka) QIC  private business enterprise handling ‘venture capital’ where new project funding amounts may be decidely broken down into smaller amounts or pooled into much larger amounts for dispersals to clandestine other secret-sensitive intelligence programs, projects and/or operations that gain the strength to easily remain ‘outside U.S. Congress intelligence oversight board committees and subcommittee scrutinization.

Directorate Central Intelligence ( DCI ) ochestral management arrangements within its IN-Q-IT INTERFACE CENTER ( QIC ) realizes from foreign historical prospectives that when a private business exercises ‘en masse privatized mind teams’ to understands today’s falabilities in-keeping with human frailties encountering CIA inherent procedural compartmentalization of secrets rule ( no “talking around” ) requiring those of such outside each task to be unable to quickly assemble an ‘overall picture’ of what overall CIA plans consist of – at least that’s how it’s supposed to work but rarely does – so, while that alone ( in and of itself ), became a “problem set” to solve that drastic measures needed taking. Hence, the CIA “radical departure” plan has another design serving to counteract intelligence information leaks.

Ingenious, is a very small word to describe even one ( 1 ) facet of this CIA private business plan where the public has its limited understanding confusingly ’shifted from what it perceives to be government secrets’ moved rapidly back and forth between ‘private sector secrets’ in what only but a few perceive to be a ‘new wave intelligence form’ or ‘combinatoric intelligence structuring’ producing a shield ( shell ) to protect even more secrets actually beneath what has become a new globally flexible CIA layered support group strengthening.

As an extremely large ’black budget’ intelligence missions funding source, CIA IN-Q-TEL INTERFACE CENTER would only be the recipient of limited and toned recommendations supplied by the QIC Board of Advisors ( CIA headquarters ) as measures to be reviewed for eventual implimentation by the QIC Board of Trustees for the essential discretionary manipulation of sophisticated:

1. Technologies [ i.e. XEROX PARC RESEARCH CENTER, et al. ];

2. Vendors [ i.e. LOCKHEED, et al. ];

2. Debt [ i.e. TELECREDIT INC., et al. ];

3. Capital [ i.e. MARSH & MCLENNAN CAPITAL INC. ];

4. Stock Market Trading [ i.e. GOLDMAN SACHS & CO. ]; plus,

5. More.

The report ( below ) shows ‘whom’ were initially placed in ‘experienced authoritative positions’ and shows ’whom’ were chosen as ’senior level executive advisors’, all selectively chosen by the CIA pulling them from ‘key critical private businesses’ to ‘guide’ the private U.S. Central Intelligence Agency business venture.

Such should really come as no surprise, at least to those understanding mechanics of international business, trading and finance where all domestic and foreign bank account transactions are mirrored under oversight by the United States Federal Reserve System ( FED ) and U.S. Securities And Exchange Commission ( SEC ), the latter two ( 2 ) of which are ‘overseen’ by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ).

This information was dervived from, outside ’market sensitive‘ ( stock market trading ) material, a Critical Sensitive National Security report [ August 13, 2001 ] of the U.S. Congress, House of Representatives Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations ( Subcommittee ) of the Committee on Financial Services relying on information supplied by, amongst others, the SEC Divisions of Enforcement and Corporation Finance, Offices of the Chief Accountant, General Counsel, Compliance, Inspections and Examinations, Office of the Comptroller, Office of Economic Analysis, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ).

But, is all this ‘really going on’? See full report ( below ).

– – – –

Courtesy: Unwanted Publicity Information Group

Source: X-CIA Files [ now defunct MSN Group website ]

 

 

 

CIA Sends Hi-Tech Tsunami Warnings by, X-CIA Files – Staff Writer [ AnExCIA@bluewin.ch ]

March 12, 1999

USA, California, Menlo Park – The first ‘publicly open contract’ between a so-called ‘private firm’ partnering with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) where the private corporation whose CIA members conceived and funded it is known as the In-Q-Tel Corporation was formerly known as the In-Q-It Corporation.

In-Q-Tel is actually one of many CIA private-sector business partners, which is not all that uncommon a partnership, like what the CIA has had for decades with the MITRE CORPORATION (USA), BELL LABORATORIES ( Canada ), and TRW Power Thrusting Division ( Hawthorne, California, USA ), remote control center for CIA maneuvering Tracking Data and Relay Satellites ( TDRS ) and the Killer HUGHES ( KH-11 ) anti-satellite satellite ( space born destructive laser platform ) series.

The publicly revealed partnership between the CIA and IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION has sent another tsunami warning to Japan at its NIPPON ELECTRIC CORPORATION ( NEC ) high-technology monopoly, that has been right on the heels of advanced high-technology advancements seen within the RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK ( North Carolina, USA ).

There is some doubt and controversy though between what the CIA says In-Q-Tel is, verses what Q-In-Tel says it is.

CIA claims ( on its website ) that Q-In-Tel is a “‘non-profit’ organization.”

IN-Q-TEL states it has had ’profitability in-mind for quite some time’.

Let’s see what the facts reveal (below), allowing casual observers to make up their own minds about just what IN-Q-TEL ‘really is’:

The In-Q-Tel Heirarchy

CIA IN-Q-TEL INTERFACE CENTER ( QIC ) players are stacked-up on a list that reads like something out-of a Robert Ludlum novel – filled with international intrigue high-tech corporatarchy.

CIA IN-Q-TEL INTERFACE CENTER ( QIC ) Board of Trustees is a Who’s-Who of ‘big corporate’ America:

– Gilman Louie, CEO of IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION, most recently was HASBRO INTERACTIVE Chief Creative Officer and General Manager of the GAMES.COM group ( responsible for creating the HASBRO internet game site ), previously serving as Chairman of the Board of MICROPOSE, CEO and Chairman of SPECTRUM HOLOBYTE, CEO of SPHERE INC., and is on the Boards of Directors of numerous software firms.;

– Lee Ault, Chairman, former Chairman and CEO of TELECREDIT INC.;

– Norman Augustine, former Chairman and CEO of LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION;

– John Seely Brown, Chief Scientist, XEROX CORPORATION and President, XEROX PARC RESEARCH CENTER;

– Michael Crow, Executive Vice Provost of Columbia University;

– Stephen Friedman, Senior Principal of MARSH & MCLENNAN CAPITAL INC., and former Chairman of GOLDMAN SACHS AND CO.;

– Paul Kaminski, former U.S. Department Of Defense ( DoD ) Undersecretary for the U.S. Defense Acquisition and Technology Office, President and CEO of TECHNOVATIONS INC., and Senior Partner in GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS;

– Jeong Kim, President of CARRIER NETWORK, part of the LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, and former founder of YURIE SYSTEMS;

– John McMahon, former Deputy Director of U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ), former President and CEO of LOCKHEED MISSILE & SPACE COMPANY, and consultant to LOCKHEED-MARTIN CORPORATION;

– Alex Mandl, Chairman and CEO of TELIGENT, and former President and CEO of AT&T; and,

– William Perry, former U.S. Department Of Defense Secretary and currently Berberian Professor at Leiland Stanford University.

New CIA Use Of In-Q-Tel Interface Center ( QI.C )

In-Q-Tel is a new non-profit corporation funded by the CIA to seek Information Technology ( IT ) solutions to the Agency’s most critical needs. A unique venture, was formed to enable the Agency ( CIA ) to have access to ‘emerging and developing information technology’ in a timely manner.

QIC ( IN-Q-TEL INTERFACE CENTER ) is the ‘interface center’ linking the IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION to the Agency ( CIA ).

QIC – CIA Function

QIC develops a problem set for In-Q-Tel, partners with In-Q-Tel in the solution acceptance process and manages the Agency’s relationship with In-Q-Tel.

QIC plans and evaluates the partnership program, protects CIA security and CIA counter-intelligence interests and communicates the QIC / In-Q-Tel venture to the World.

CIA – QIC Function

The CIA, working in partnership with IN-Q-TEL, created the Agency’s ( CIA ) new found organization QIC.

QIC goals now, are to be the leading source for commercial, high impact IT solutions for the Agency ( CIA ), and will be herald as the single most important contributor to the Intelligence Community by the year 2001. QIC will create and use the full range of corporate processes needed to manage QIC (aka) the ” CIA-In-Q-Tel Partnership ” by delivering CIA-accepted IT solutions.

CIA Goals With QIC

Eventually, IN-Q-TEL will take on a life funded by the high-technology consumer public. QIC ( IN-Q-TEL Interface Center ) however, works comprehensively and collaboratively with Agency ( CIA ) IT specialists, customers, IN-Q-TEL experts, Agency ( CIA ) managers, the Chief Information Officer, the Chief Technology Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Agency directorates, and Executive Board to develop an annual coordinated and approved critical ‘problem set’ for IN-Q-TEL.

QIC, leads Agency participation in the partnership’s solution transfer planning, including resources, technology demonstration, and prototype testing and evaluation.

At the same time, QIC works with In-Q-Tel to assure that it addresses issues regarding the transfer of IT solutions into the Agency. QIC also works with Agency customers and their managers to create an environment conducive to the implementation and acceptance of partnership solutions and follow-on initiative.

In-Q-Tel Background

On September 29, 1999 the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was treated to something different. In many of the nation’s leading newspapers and television news programs a story line had appeared that complimented the Agency for its creativity and openness.

The media was drawn to a small corporation in Washington, D.C. that had just unveiled its existence and the hiring of its first CEO, Gilman Louie who described the Corporation called, the “IN-Q-IT CORPORATION“, as having been formed “…to ensure that the CIA remains at the cutting edge of information technology advances and capabilities.”

With that statement the Agency ( CIA ) launched a new era in ‘how it obtains cutting-edge technologies’.

In early January 2000, the name of the corporation ( IN-Q-IT CORPORATION ) was changed to IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION.

The ‘origins of the concept’ that has become IN-Q-TEL are traceable to Dr. Ruth David, former CIA Deputy Director for Science and Technology.

She and CIA Science And Technology Deputy Director, Joanne Isham, were the first senior Agency ( CIA ) officials to understand that the information revolution required the CIA to forge ‘new partnerships’ with the ‘private sector’ and ‘design a proposal for radical change’.

The timing of the proposal was fortuitous.

CIA Director of Central Intelligence ( DCI ), Mr. George Tenet, had just launched his own Strategic Direction Initiative ( SDI) – also known as “Star Wars“ – included technology as one of its areas for review.

The study made a direct link between Agency ( CIA ) ‘future technology investments’ and ‘improving’ its ‘information gathering’ and ‘analysis capabilities’.

By the summer of 1998, the Agency ( CIA ) had assembled a few senior Agency ( CIA ) ‘staff employees with an entrepreneurial bent’ and ‘empowered them’ to take the Dr. Ruth David original concept and flesh it out.

Aided by a ‘consulting group’ and a ‘law firm’, they ( CIA ) devoted the next 4-months to making the rounds in Silicon Valley ( California ) – and elsewhere – putting the concept through the wringer. Much of the ‘time was spent listening’.

Many they met with were often critical of one aspect or another of the concept.

But, whether they were ‘venture capitalists’, Chief Executive Officers ( CEO ), Chief Technical Officers ( CTO ) or men of Congress and staffers, all eagerly immersed themselves in spirited debates that enriched the Agency ( CIA ) team and ‘drove the concept in new directions’.

By the end of 1998, the Agency  CIA ) team reached a point at which the concept seemed about right.

Though’ it had changed considerably’ from that which had been proposed initially by Dr. Ruth David, it remained true to its core principles.

It was time to hand the ‘product’ of the Agency ( CIA ) work over to someone in the ‘private sector’ with the ‘experience’ and passion necessary ‘to start the Corporation’.

To the delight of the DCI and Agency ( CIA ) team, Norman Augustine, a former CEO of LOCKHEED-MARTIN and 4-time recipient of the Department of Defense highest civilian award, the Distinguished Service Medal, accepted the challenge.

By February 1999, the Corporation was established as a legal entity, and in March [ 1999 ] it [ IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION ] received its first [ 1st ] contract from the Agency ( CIA ). In-Q-Tel was in business, charged with ‘accessing information technology ( IT ) expertise and technology wherever it existed’ and brought it to bear on the’ information management’ challenges facing the Agency ( CIA ).

In-Q-Tel Creation

As an information based agency, the CIA must be at the cutting edge of information technology in order to maintain its competitive edge and provide its customers with intelligence that is both timely and relevant.

Many times the Agency and the federal government have been the catalysts for technological innovations. Examples of Agency ( CIA ) inspired breakthroughs, include the LOCKHEED AEROSPACE aircraft designed U-2 ( Dragon Lady ) and SR-71 ( Black Bird )reconnaissance aircraft and the CORONA ‘surveillance’ satellites, while the ‘parent of the Internet’ [ Advanced Research Projects Agency (aka) ARPA.NET ] was led forward with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ( DARPA ).

By the 1990s, however – especially with the advent of the World Wide Web – the ‘commercial market’ was setting the pace in IT innovation.

And, as is the nature of a market-based economy, the ‘flow of capital’ and ‘talent’ has irresistibly ‘moved to the commercial sector’ where the prospect of huge profits from ‘initial public offerings‘ ( IPO ) and ‘equity-based compensation‘ has become ‘the norm’.

In contrast to the remarkable transformations taking place in Silicon Valley ( California ) and elsewhere, the Agency ( CIA ) – like many large Cold War era ‘private sector corporations’ – felt itself being ‘left behind’. It ( CIA ) was not connected to the creative forces that underpin the digital economy.

And, of equal importance, many in Silicon Valley ( California ) knew little about the Agency ( CIA ) IT ( information technology ) needs.

The opportunities and challenges posed by the information revolution to the Agency ( CIA ) core mission areas of ‘clandestine collection’ and ‘all-source analysis’ were growing daily.

Moreover, the [ CIA ] challenges are not merely from foreign countries, but also ‘transnational threats’.

Faced with these realities [ by 1997 ], the leadership of the CIA made a critical and strategic decision in early 1998.

The Agency’s leadership recognized that the CIA did not, and could not, compete for IT ( information technology ) innovation and talent with the same speed and agility that those in the ‘commercial marketplace’, whose businesses are driven by “Internet time” and ‘profit’, could.

The CIA mission ‘was’ intelligence collection and analysis, not IT innovation.

The leadership also understood that, in order to extend its reach and access a broad network of IT innovators, the Agency had to step outside of itself and appear not just as a buyer of IT but also as a seller.

The CIA had to offer Silicon Valley ( County of Santa Clara, California ) something of value, a business model that the Valley [ Silicon Valley ] understood; a model that ‘provides’ – for those who joined hands ( became partner affiliates ) with IN-Q-TEL – the ‘opportunity to commercialize’ their ‘innovations’. In addition, IN-Q-TEL ‘partner companies’ would also ‘gain another valuable asset’, access to very difficult CIA ‘problem sets’ that could become ‘market drivers’.

Once the Agency ( CIA ) leadership crossed these critical decision points, the path leading to IN-Q-TEL formation was clear.

In-Q-Tel – Close-Up

In-Q-Tel founder, Norm Augustine, established it as an independent non-profit corporation.

Its Board of Trustees, which now has 10 members, functions as any other board, initially guiding and overseeing the Corporation’s startup activities and setting its strategic direction and policies.

The CEO, who was ‘recruited’ by the Board [ Board of Trustees for IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION ], reports to them [ Board of Trustees for IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION ], and ‘manages’ IN-Q-TEL.

The Corporation [ IN-Q-TEL ] has offices in two ( 2 ) locations:

1. Washington, D.C.; and,

2. Menlo Park, California [ Silicon Valley ].

It [ IN-Q-TEL ] employs a ‘small professional staff’ and a ‘smaller group’ of ‘business consultants’ and ‘technology consultants’.

In-Q-Tel’s mission is to foster the development of new and ‘emerging information technologies’ and pursue ‘research and development’ ( R&D ) that produce solutions to some of the most difficult IT [ information technology ] problems facing the CIA.

To accomplish this, the Corporation [ IN-Q-TEL ] will network extensively with those in ‘industry’, the ‘venture capital’ community, academia, and any ‘others’ who are at the ‘forefront of IT [ information technology ] innovation’.

Through the business relationships that it establishes, In-Q-Tel will create environments for collaboration, product demonstration, prototyping, and evaluation.

From these activities will flow the IT solutions that the Agency ( CIA ) seeks and, ‘most importantly’, the ‘commercial opportunities’ for ‘product development’ by its ‘partners’.

To fulfill its mission, In-Q-Tel has designed itself to be:

– Agile to respond, rapidly to Agency needs and commercial imperatives;

– Problem driven, to link its work to Agency program managers;

– Solutions focused, to improve the Agency’s capabilities;

– Team oriented, to bring diverse participation and synergy to projects;

– Technology aware, to identify, leverage, and integrate existing products and solutions;

– Output measured, to produce quantifiable results;

– Innovative, to reach beyond the existing state-of-the-art in IT; and,

– Over time, self-sustaining, to reduce its reliance on CIA funding.

At its core, In-Q-Tel is designed to operate in the market place on an equal footing with its commercial peers and with the speed and agility that the IT world demands.

As an example, it [ IN-Q-TEL ] can ‘effect the full range of business transactions‘ common to the industry – it is ‘venture [ venture capital ] enabled’, can ‘establish joint ventures‘, ‘fund grants [ grant funding ]‘, sponsor open competitions, ‘award sole source contracts‘, etc. And, ‘because of the many degrees of freedom granted to it‘ [ IN-Q-TEL ] by the Agency ( CIA ), IN-Q-TEL ‘does not require Agency ( CIA ) approval for business deals it negotiates‘.

As such, In-Q-Tel represents a different approach to government R&D.

It [ IN-Q-TEL ] ‘moves away from the more traditional government project’ office model in which the program is managed by the government.

Instead, the Agency ( CIA ) has invested much of the decision-making in the Corporation [ IN-Q-TEL ].

Hence, In-Q-Tel will be judged on the outcomes produced, i.e. the solutions generated, and not by the many decisions it makes along the way.

In-Q-Tel – IT Space

As with many aspects of the In-Q-Tel venture, the Agency took a different approach in presenting its IT needs to the Corporation. It bounded the types of work that In-Q-Tel would perform – its IT operating “space” – by two ( 2 ) criteria:

In the first [ 1st ] instance, it made the decision that In-Q-Tel would initially conduct only unclassified IT work for the Agency ( CIA ).

Second [ 2nd ], to attract the interests of the private sector, it recognized that IN-Q-TEL would ‘principally invest in areas’ where there was both an Agency ( CIA ) need and ‘private sector interest’.

Whereas in the past, much of the commercial computing world did not focus on those technologies useful to the CIA, the intersection zone between intelligence and private sector IT needs has grown tremendously in recent years.

Many of the underlying technologies that are driving the information revolution are now directly applicable to the intelligence business. Examples of commercial applications that also support intelligence functions are:

1. Data warehousing and data mining; 2. Knowledge management; 3. Profiling search agents [ Search Engines and User search requests ]; 4. Geographic information systems [ Satellite Communication Information Systems ]; 5. Imagery analysis and pattern recognition; 6. Statistical data analysis tools; 7. Language translation; 8. Targeted information systems; 9. Mobile computing; and, 10. Secure computing.

Information Security or INFOSEC, a critical enabling technology for all intelligence information systems, is now a mainstream area of research and innovation in the commercial world, due in no small part to the exponential growth in Internet e-commerce.

Thus, there are a number of commercially available security technologies:

1. Strong encryption; 2. Secure community of interests; 3. Authentication and access control; 4. Auditing and reporting; 5. Data integrity; 6. Digital signatures; 7. Centralized security administration; 8. Remote users or traveling users; and, 9. Unitary log-in.

It is, no doubt, the case that the commercial investments flowing into information security outpace the spending made by the Intelligence Community.

Thus, In-Q-Tel will be poised to ‘leverage the investments of others to the benefit of the Agency ( CIA )‘.

Having bounded In-Q-Tel’s IT space with these 2 criteria – ‘unclassified work’ with ‘commercial potential’ – the Agency defined a set of strategic problem areas for the Corporation.

These four ( 4 ) areas have the added and obvious benefit of spanning the needs of all the Agency’s directorates and, hence, its core business functions of collection and analysis:

1. Information Security: Hardening, and intrusion detection, monitoring and profiling of information use and misuse, and network and data protection.;

2. Use of the Internet: Secure receipt of information, non-observable surfing, authentication, content verification, and hacker resistance.;

3. Distributed Architectures: Methods to interface with custom / legacy systems, mechanisms to allow dissimilar applications to interact, automatic handling of archived data, and connectivity across a wide range of environments.; and,

4. Knowledge Generation: Geospatial data fusion and multimedia data fusion or integration and, computer forensics.

Information Technology ( IT ) In-Q-Tel – CIA Occupancy

It will no doubt raise questions with some who will believe that it or the Agency ( CIA ) have other motives.

It is, therefore, important to highlight ‘what In-Q-Tel is not’ and what it [ IN-Q-TEL ] will not do.

First, it is not a front company for the Agency ( CIA ) to conduct any activities other than those spelled out in its Articles of Incorporation and its Charter Agreement.

As a non-profit – 501(c)3 – corporation, it will operate in full compliance with the Internal Revenue Service ( IRS ) regulations and, as with all similar non-profits, its IRS filing will be a matter public record.

In-Q-Tel is ‘openly affiliated with the Agency ( CIA )’, as was made obvious to the world during its press rollout on September 29, 1999.

Of equal importance, it will not initiate work in areas that lead to solutions that are put into so-called “black boxes” – that is, innovations that the government subsequently classifies. To do so would undercut In-Q-Tel credibility with its business partners to the detriment of the Agency.

Finally, IN-Q-TELis a solutions company‘, ‘not a product company‘.

Working through its business partners, it will demonstrate solutions to Agency problems but will not generate products for use by Agency components.

In-Q-Tel ‘inspired products‘ will be ‘developed through separate contractual arrangements‘ involving Agency ( CIA ) ‘components‘ and ‘other vendors‘.

In-Q-Tel – Structure & Staffing

Central to the In-Q-Tel business model are speed, agility, market positioning, and leveraging.

These attributes, taken together, have helped shape the evolving structure of the Corporation. It is one that intends to emphasize the “virtual” nature of the Corporation while minimizing “brick and mortar” costs, i.e. it will operate by facilitating data sharing, and decisionmaking via seamless communications using a private network with broadband connectivity to the Agency and its partners, while limiting direct infrastructure investments in laboratories and related facilities by leveraging the facilities of others.

To facilitate this intent, the In-Q-Tel Board and CEO decided to hire a small staff composed of people with strong technical and business skills.

At present, the Corporation has about ten ( 10 ) staff employees and, it is expected that, by the end of the year 2000, the total will number about thirty ( 30 ).

The CEO is currently designing In-Q-Tel management structure, but the parameters he has set for it indicate that it will be very flat and aligned for rapid decision-making.

How In-Q-Tel Works

One of the great leaps of faith the Agency took in this venture was to recognize, early on, that private sector businessmen were better equipped than it was to design the Corporation and create its work program.

The Agency’s critical role was to develop the initial concept, help form the best Board possible, give IN-Q-TEL a challenging problem set, and then design a ‘contractual vehicle‘ that ‘gave‘ the [ CIA ] CorporationQIC ] the ‘necessary degrees of freedom to design itself and operate in the market place‘.

All of this was accomplished in less than 1-year, to include the design of In-Q-Tel’s initial work program. In-Q-Tel’s current work program is built on a process of discrete, yet overlapping, elements – IT roadmapping, IT baselining, and R&D projects.

The underlying philosophy now driving the In-Q-Tel program is to gain an understanding of the many players occupying In-Q-Tel’s IT space – by roadmap analysis – and, concurrently, test and validate the performance and utility of existing products and technologies – by baseline testing – against current Agency needs.

If the test results are successful, the Agency ( CIA ) has the ‘option’ of quickly ‘purchasing’ the ‘products’ directly ‘from the vendor’.

However, in those ‘cases where there are no existing products or technologies‘, or where a gap exists between the baseline test results and the Agency ( CIA ) needs, IN-Q-TEL will launch R&D projects.

In this way, the Agency ( CIA ) obtains near-term solutions through the evaluation of those products considered “best-in-class” and can target its R&D projects more precisely – that-is, to where ‘commercial‘ or ‘other government [ contract ] IT investments [ $ ] are small‘ or nonexistent.

With its first [ 1st ] year budget of about $28,000,000 million, In-Q-Tel has focused its initial efforts on the IT roadmap and baseline elements of the program.

The roadmap project seeks, first, to ‘identify those in industry, government, and academia who occupy the same IT space as In-Q-Tel’ and, secondarily, to ‘spot existing technologies of potential interest’.

The results will also help In-Q-Tel leverage the technical advances made by others, assess the overall direction and pace of research, avoid duplicating work done by other government entities, and highlight [ identify and target ] potential business partners. The roadmap will be updated and refined by In-Q-Tel throughout the life of its work program.

Two ( 2 ) Team Incubators & Twenty ( 20 ) Hi-Tech Firms [ Businesses ]

These twenty (20) are executing the baseline-testing element of the In-Q-Tel work program. They were selected by an independent review panel of national IT experts convened by In-Q-Tel to evaluate multiple proposals.

Each of the two ( 2 ) teams is working on one ( 1 ) or more ‘incubator concepts’ derived by In-Q-Tel from the Agency ( CIA ) ‘problem set‘ enumerated above. The incubator teams will operate for over a [ 1 ] year. As the In-Q-Tel work program grows, it is possible that other baseline incubator teams will be established.

The R&D part of the program, which In-Q-Tel manages, will soon become the core of its activities, with a growing percentage of its funds directed towards a portfolio of research projects. In-Q-Tel is formulating its research thrusts based on the information and test results gathered under the roadmap and baseline work, aided by extensive interactions with the private sector and the Agency.

The design of the research projects will be set by In-Q-Tel and will vary to meet the mutual interests of the Agency ( CIA ), In-Q-Tel, and its prospective business partners.

As mentioned earlier, In-Q-Tel will ‘draw from a broad range of R&D competition‘ models to attract the business partners it seeks.

In some cases, it may assemble teams of companies that each has a necessary part, but not the whole, of the solution In-Q-Tel seeks.

In ‘other projects’ IN-Q-TEL might be a co-investor in a fledgling company with another business partner such as a venture capital firm.

Or, it could take a more traditional route, using a request for proposal.

In essence, In-Q-Tel will use whatever model most efficiently and effectively meets the needs of all parties to a transaction, with a constant eye towards leveraging its resources and solving the Agency’s IT needs.

Common to most or all of the R&D agreements that In-Q-Tel intends to use will be the subject of intellectual property (IP), or more precisely said, the ownership of IP and the allocation of IP generated revenues.

In the area of IT R&D, a deal is typically not struck until all of the parties’ IP rights are clearly established.

In-Q-Tel’s acceptance within the IT market place depends heavily on its ability to negotiate industry standard IP terms.

Recognizing this, the Agency ( CIA ) agreement with In-Q-Tel allows it and/or its partners to retain title to the innovations created and freely negotiate the allocation of IP derived revenues.

The only major stipulation is that the Agency ( CIA ) retain traditional “government purpose rights” to the ‘innovations‘.

Contract Model – In-Q-Tel

Before the partnership between In-Q-Tel and the Agency became a reality, the Agency ( CIA ) had to develop a new contract vehicle that granted the Corporation [ QIC ] the degrees of freedom it needed to operate in the market place.

Most Agency ( CIA ) contracts, including those in R&D, are based on the Federal Acquisition Regulations ( FAR ), however FAR is often viewed by industry as overly burdensome and inflexible. And, it has been the U.S. Department of Defense ( DoD ) experience that smaller companies often will not contract with the government because of the extra costs they would incur to be FAR compliant.

Because the Agency ( CIA ) wanted to encourage such companies to work with In-Q-Tel, it took a different approach and designed a non-FAR agreement with the IN-Q-TEL CORPORATION.

It [ CIA ] also adopted elements from the old internet Godfather, i.e. Advanced Research Projects Agency or ARPA and its model based on “Other Transactions ( OT )” authority granted to the DoD [ U.S. Department of Defense ] by Congress [ U.S. Congress ].

OT [ Other Transaction ] agreements ‘permit authorized government agencies’ [ e.g. CIA ] to design R&D agreements outside the FAR.

The hoped for result is to spur greater flexibility and innovation for the government. In addition, it permits well-managed businesses, large and small, to perform R&D for the government, using their existing business practices and procedures.

Using an ARPA model OT agreement as a guide, the Agency ( CIA ) designed a 5-year Charter Agreement that describes the broad framework for its relationship with IN-Q-TEL, sets forth general policies, and establishes the terms and conditions that will apply to future contracts. In addition, a short-term funding contract was negotiated that includes In-Q-Tel’s “Description of Work”.

Together these documents define the metes and bounds of the Agency ( CIA ) relationship with In-Q-Tel and permit IN-Q-TEL to negotiate agreements with its partners, absent [ without ] most government flow down requirements.

In-Q-Tel – Advancements

The In-Q-Tel venture is one that has challenged the Agency to think creatively and quickly to address the fundamental changes that the information revolution is having on its core business.

It responded by setting aside traditional policies and practices in many areas and established a new partnership with industry and academia, based on shared interest and mutual benefit.

But, one cannot ignore that this venture involves risk, both for the Agency and In-Q-Tel. From the Agency’s perspective there are three ( 3 ) major areas that will require constant attention:

1. Managing its relationship with IN-Q-TEL;

2. Solution transfer; and,

3. Security.

Perhaps the most important of the three is the first, managing the relationship without stifling In-Q-Tel’s competitive edge.

IN-Q-TEL is a small independent corporation ‘established to improve the mission performance of a much larger government Agency‘. [ ? National Secruity Agency ( NSA ) ? ]

The imperatives that led to In-Q-Tel have many parallels in industry. In fact, the IT sector is replete with examples of a large corporation seeking to improve its competitiveness by either purchasing a small start-up company or forming a subsidiary.

The ‘parent corporation‘ [ ? ] sees in ‘its offspring‘ traits that it no longer possesses – speed, agility, and expertise. But, for these traits to be realized, ‘the start-up‘ must operate unencumbered from the ‘parent corporation‘ [ ? ], whose natural tendency is to rein in and control it.

Similarly, the Agency ( CIA ) will have to restrain its natural inclination to micromanage IN-Q-TEL and, instead, allow the Corporation [ QIC ] the freedom to prosper. It must have continuous insight into In-Q-Tel’s activities, but must understand that In-Q-Tel is responsible for its own operations, including the design and management of the work program.

Acceptance by Agency ( CIA ) components of In-Q-Tel inspired solutions will be the most important measure of success in this venture. It is also likely to be the hardest.

While there is every expectation that In-Q-Tel will become commercially successful and seed innovative solutions, if they are not accepted and used by Agency line managers, then the overall venture will be judged a failure.

Although In-Q-Tel has a critical role in the solution transfer process, the burden rests with the Agency, since the challenges are as much managerial and cultural as they are technical.

The Agency ( CIA ) Chief Information Officer ( CIO ), directorate heads, and component directors will all have to work closely with IN-Q-TEL to overcome bureaucratic inertia and identify eager recipients of the innovations that the Corporation develops.

Agency ( CIA ) “product champions” for each IN-Q-TEL project should be identified early and should participate fully in its formulation, testing, and evaluation. Incentives should be considered for those Agency ( CIA ) components that commit to projects with unique risks or that require extensive personnel commitments.

These and other strategies will be employed to ensure that the return on the Agency’s investment in In-Q-Tel translates into measurable improvements in its mission performance.

The open affiliation between the CIA and In-Q-Tel is yet another unique aspect and challenge for this venture. Although the Corporation [ QIC ]will be doing only unclassified work for the Agency ( CIA ), the nature of its IT research and its association with a US intelligence agency will undoubtedly attract the interests of foreign persons, some with questionable motives.

The obvious security ramifications of this scenario were well considered in the decisionmaking process that led to In-Q-Tel’s formation. It was ultimately decided that the risks are manageable and, in many ways, are similar to those faced by any high-tech company trying to protect its IP and trade secrets.

IN-Q-TEL and the Agency ( CIA ) will be working closely to ensure that the Corporation [ QIC ] operates with a high degree of security awareness and support.

In-Q-Tel has a critical role in meeting these three ( 3 ) challenges. However, it’s most persistent challenge will be developing and sustaining a reputation as a business that:

1. sponsors leading edge research;

2. produces discoveries; that can be,

3. profitably commercialized.

Once it has established a record of accomplishment in these two areas, the high caliber IT talent the Agency hopes to reach through In-Q-Tel will be drawn to the Corporation.

In-Q-Tel Future

Those of us at the Agency who helped to create In-Q-Tel are endlessly optimistic about its prospects for success. The early indicators are all positive. Among them is the caliber of the people who stand behind and lead the Corporation and the initial reaction from industry and the trade press to its formation.

IN-Q-TEL Board of Trustees is at least the equal of any large corporation’s board. They are committed to the Agency ( CIA ) mission, the new R&D model that IN-Q-TEL represents, and have invested much of their time to its formation.

The Agency and the nation are in their debt.

The Board [ IN-Q-TEL Board of Trustees ] also recruited an outstanding CEO who brings with him the ‘experiences’ and ‘contacts’ of his Silicon Valley [ California ] base and an established reputation for starting and growing new IT companies.

The favorable press coverage of In-Q-Tel combined with the industry “buzz” engendered by the Board and CEO have brought a flood of inquiries by those interested in doing business with the Corporation. And, most importantly, its work program is already beginning to achieve results that the Agency ( CIA ) can use and that its ( CIA ) partners can commercialize.

Judging by the record to date, the road ahead appears promising. But, In-Q-Tel’s fate also rests in part on those institutions charged with oversight of the Agency and its budget.

Congress has supported the Agency as it launched this new venture. The U.S. Congress “seeded the venture with start-up funding” when it was still in its conceptual phase, but asked hard questions of the Agency throughout the design and formation of In-Q-Tel.

Members understood that starting an enterprise such as IN-Q-TEL is ‘not risk free‘. As with all R&D efforts in government and industry, there will be some home run successes but also some failures. That is the price the Agency must be prepared to pay if it wants to stay on the leading edge of the IT revolution.

With In-Q-Tel’s help plus the continued support of Congress [ U.S. Congress ] and Office of Management and Budget ( OMB ), as well as from the traditional Agency ( CIA ) ‘contractor community‘ and ‘others‘, an “e-CIA” of the next century [ 21st Century ] will evolve quickly, to the benefit of the President and the national security community.

Notes Of Interest

For the next one ( 1 ) or two ( 2 ) years [ 1999 – 2000 ], IN-Q-TEL will accept work only from the CIA‘.

All solutions that it provides to the CIA will be made available to the entire Intelligence Community.

Codified in a 5-year Charter Agreement with the CIA and a 1-year funding contract that is renewable annually. As stipulated in the Charter Agreement, “…the Federal Government shall have a nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice or have practiced for or on behalf of the United States the subject invention throughout the world for Government purposes”.

The Agency ( CIA ) component that has day-to-day responsibility for guiding the CIA relationship with IN-Q-TEL, including the ‘design and implementation of the contract’ and the ‘problem set’, is the IN-Q-TEL INTERFACE CENTER ( QIC ) which resides inside the CIA Directorate of Science and Technology.

Circa: 2002 – 2008

IN-Q-TEL INCORPORATED (aka) IN-Q-IT CORPORATION 2500 Sand Hill Road – Suite 113 Menlo Park, California 94025 – 7061 USA TEL: +1 (650) 234-8999 TEL: +1 (650) 234-8983 FAX: +1 (650) 234-8997 WWW: http://www.inqtel.com WWW: http://www.in-q-tel.org WWW: http://www.in-q-tel.com

IN-Q-TEL INCORPORATED (aka) IN-Q-IT CORPORATION P.O. Box 12407 Arlington, Virginia 22219 USA TEL: +1 (703) 248-3000 FAX: +1 (703) 248-3001

– –

IN-Q-TEL focus areas, surround:

– Physical Technologies; – Biological Technologies; – Security; and, – Software Infrastructure.

– –

IN-Q-TEL

Investments –

Strategic Investments, Targeted Returns

In-Q-Tel is ‘building’ a ‘portfolio of companies’ that are ‘developing innovative solutions’ in ‘key technology areas’

Similar to many ‘corporate strategic venture’ firms, In-Q-Tel seeks to ‘optimize potential returns’ for our clients — the CIA and the broader Intelligence Community— by investing in companies of strategic interest.

In-Q-Tel engages ‘start-ups’, ‘emerging’ and ‘established’ companies, universities and research labs.

In-Q-Tel structure attractive win-win relationships through ‘equity investments’, as well ‘strategic product development funding’, and ‘innovative intellectual property arrangements’ and ‘government business development guidance’.

An Enterprising Partner –

In-Q-Tel ‘portfolio companies’ value a ‘strategic relationship’ with a ‘proactive partner’.

Companies, that work through In-Q-Tel due diligence process, know their technologies have the potential to address the needs of one of the most discriminating enterprise customers in the world.

In-Q-Tel takes a hands-on approach, working closely with our ‘portfolio companies’ to help ‘drive their success’ in the ‘marketplace’ and to ‘mature [ ‘grow’ ] their technologies’.

In-Q-Tel ‘investment goals’ are focused on ‘return’ on technology – a ‘blend of factors’ that will ‘deliver strategic impact’ on the Agency [ CIA ] mission:

– Effective ‘deployments’ of innovative technologies to the CIA; – Commercially successful ‘companies that can continue’ to ‘deliver’ and ‘support’ innovate technologies; and, – Financial ‘returns to fund further technology investments’ to ‘benefit the Intelligence Community’.   Investing In Our National Security –

In just a few short years, In-Q-Tel has ‘evaluated’ nearly two thousand [ 2,000 ] ‘proposals’:

75% [ 1,500 ] of which have come from companies that had never previously considered working with the government.

To date, In-Q-Tel ‘established strategic relationships’ with more than ‘twenty’ ( 20 ) of these ‘companies’.

Read more about our ‘portfolio companies’ and ‘technology partners’, or learn how to submit a business plan to In-Q-Tel.

Areas Of Focus –

IN-Q-TEL focuses on next generation technologies for gathering, analyzing, managing and disseminating data. Learn more about our areas of focus:

Knowledge Management: [ http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/tech/km.html ];

Security and Privacy: [ http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/tech/sp.html ];

Search and Discovery: [ http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/tech/sd.html ];

Distributed Data Collection: [ http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/tech/dd.html ]; and,

Geospatial Information Services: [ http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/tech/gi.html ].

Submit A Business Plan –

“In-Q-Tel also has garnered a reputation in the tech and VC [ Venture Capital ] worlds for being hard-nosed during due diligence. Unlike some venture firms, In-Q-Tel is staffed with hard-core techies who know how to put a program through the ringer. They’ve also got one of the roughest testing domains: the computer systems of the CIA.” – Washington Business Journal ( November 19, 2001 )

– View our criteria [ http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/submit/index.html ] for submission, and apply for consideration online.

Media Resources –

– Investment Portfolio: [ http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/news/attachments/InQTelInvestmentPortfolio.pdf ].

Reference

http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/www.inqtel.com/invest/index.html

– – – –

Circa: 2002

IN-Q-TEL

Investments –

Technology Partners ( 2002 ) –

INKTOMI [ http://www.inktomi.com ] ( Leading Edge Search and Retrieval Technology )

INKTOMI, based in Foster City, California ( USA ), has offices elsewhere in North America, Asia and Europe.

INKTOMI division business, involves:

Network Products – comprised of industry leading solutions for network caching, content distribution, media broadcasting, and wireless technologies; and,

Search Solutions – comprised of general Web search and related services, and ‘enterprise’ search.

Inktomi ‘develops’ and ‘markets’ network infrastructure software essential for ‘service providers’ and ‘global enterprises’.

Inktomi ‘customer’ and ‘strategic partner’ base of leading companies, include:

MERRILL LYNCH; INTEL: AT&T; MICROSOFT; SUN MICROSYSTEMS; HEWLETT-PACKARD; COMPAQ; DELL; NOKIA; AMERICA ONLINE ( AOL ); and, YAHOO.

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) Lead System Integrator ( LSI ) – SAIC LSI [ http://www.saic.com/contractcenter/ites-2s/clients.html  ]

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ), founded in 1969 by Dr. J. R. Beyster who remained with SAIC for 30-years until at least November 3, 2003, has had as part of its management, and on its Board of Directors, many well known former U.S. government personnel, including:

– Melvin Laird, Secretary of Defense in the Richard Milhouse Nixon Presidential Administration;

– William Perry, Secretary of Defense in the William Jefferson Clinton Presidential Administration;

– John M. Deutch, U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) Director of Central Intelligence ( DCI ) in the William Jefferson Clinton Presidential Administration;

– U.S. Navy Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, U.S. National Security Agency ( NSA ) and U.S. Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) – various employed capacities in ‘both’ Agencies – in the Gerald Ford Presidential Administration, Billy Carter Presidential Administration and Ronald Reagan Presidential Administration;

– David Kay, who led the search for Weapons of Mass Destruction ( WMD ) – following the 1991 U.S. Persian Gulf War – for the United Nations ( UN ) and in the George W. Bush Sr. Presidential Administration following the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

In 2009, SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) moved corporate headquarters to Tysons Corner at 1710 SAIC Drive, McLean, Virginia ( USA ).

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) is a scientific, engineering and technology ‘applications company’ with numerous ‘state government clients’, ‘federal government clients’, and ‘private sector clients’.

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) works extensively, with:

U.S. Department of Defense ( DOD ); U.S. Department of Homeland Security ( DHS ); U.S. National Security Agency ( NSA ); U.S. intelligence community ( others ); U.S. government civil agencies; and, Selected commercial markets.

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) Subsidiaries –

SAIC VENTURE CAPITAL CORPORATION; SCICOM TECHNOLOGIES NOIDA ( INDIA ); BD SYSTEMS ( BDS ); BECHTEL SAIC COMPANY LLC; BECK DISASTER RECOVERY ( BDR ); R.W. BECK; BENHAM; CLOUDSHIELD; DANET; EAGAN MCALLISTER ASSOCIATES INC.; HICKS & ASSOCIATES MEDPROTECT LLC REVEAL; SAIC-FREDERICK INC.; NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE ( NCI ); SAIC INTERNATIONAL SUBSIDIARIES; SAIC LIMITED ( UK ); CALANAIS ( SCOTLAND ); VAREC; APPLIED MARINE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION; EAI CORPORATION; and, Others.

In 1991, SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) received transference of the U.S. Department of Defense ( DOJ ), U.S. Army ( USA ), Defense Intelligence Agency ( DIA ) ‘Remote Viewing Program’ renamed STARGATE Project.

In January 1999, SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) consultant Steven Hatfill saw SAIC vice president Joseph Soukup internally ( with no outside client ) commission ( with no outside client ) William C. Patrick – a retired leading figure in the legacy U.S. bioweapons program – see a report produced ( 28-pages on Feburary 1999 ) on terrorist anthrax attack possibilities via Unitd States postal mailings prior to 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States.

In March 2001, the U.S. National Security Agency ( NSA ) had SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) in ‘concept definition’ phase for what later became known as the NSA TRAILBLAZER Project, a “Digital Network Intelligence” system intended to ‘analyze data’ carried across computer ‘networks’.

In 2002, the U.S. National Security Agency ( NSA ) chose SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) to produce a ‘technology demonstration platform’ for the NSA TRAILBLAZER Project, a contract worth $280,000,000 million ( USD ).

TRAILBLAZER Project participants, included:

BOEING; COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION ( CSC ); and, BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON.

In 2005, TRAILBLAZER – believed by speculators ( http://www.PhysOrg.Com et. al. ) to be a continuation of an earlier data mining project THINTHREAD program – saw U.S. National Security Agency ( NSA ) Director Michael Hayden inform a U.S. Senate hearing that the TRAILBLAZER program required several hundred million dollars over budget – consequently trailing years behind schedule waiting for approvals.

From 2001 through 2005, SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) was primary contractor for the $600,000,000 million ( USD ) TRILOGY Program, a three ( 3 ) part program – intended to replace obsolete FBI computers with a then-new state-of-the-art cutting edge technology ‘secure high-speed computer network system’ that would install 500 computer network servers, 1600 scanners and thousands of desktop computers in FBI field offices – that on December 2003 delivered to the U.S. Department of Justice ( DOJ ) Federal Bureau of Investigation ( FBI ) its SAIC “Virtual Case File” ( VCF ), a $170,000,000 million ( USD ) software system designed to speed tracking of terrorists, better accurize communications amongst agents fighting criminals with this FBI ‘critical case management system’, however nineteen ( 19 ) different government managers involved 36 contract modifications averaging 1.3 FBI changes everyday totaling 399 changes during 15-months afterwhich the FBI continued arguing ( through its own intermediary, AEROSPACE CORPORATION ) changes until the U.S. Department of Justice ( DOJ ) Inspector General ( IG ) criticized its ‘FBI handling’ of SAIC software, whereon February 2005 SAIC ‘recommended’ the FBI at-least ‘begin using’ the SAIC TRILOGY VCF ‘case management system’.

On September 27, 2006 during a special meeting of SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) stockholders, employee-owners voted by a margin of 86% to proceed with the initial public offering ( IPO ) whereupon completion SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) also paid – to existing stockholders – a ‘special dividend’ of $1,600,000,000 billion to $2,400,000,000 billion ( USD ).

On October 17, 2006 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) conducted an initial public offering ( IPO ) of common stock offering of 86,250,000 shares priced at $15.00 per share. Underwriters – BEAR STEARNS and MORGAN STANLEY – exercised over-allotment options resulting in 11,025,000 million shares seeing the IPO raise $1,245,000,000 billion ( USD ).

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION ( SAIC ) had approximately 46,000 total employees, 16,000 employees were in McLean, Virginia ( USA ) and another 5,000 employees were in San Diego, California ( USA ).

SRA INTERNATIONAL INC. ( SRA ) [ http://www.sra.com/about-us/profile.php ]

SRA INTERNATIONAL INC., founded in 1978, headquartered in Fairfax, Virginia has additional U.S. offices.

SRA INTERNATIONAL INC. is a leading provider of information technology services and solutions to clients in national security, health care and public health, and civil government markets, requiring:

– Strategic Consulting; – Systems Design, Development, and Integration; – OutSourcing; and, – Operations Management.

SRA INTERNATIONAL INC. also delivers business solutions, for:

– Text mining; – Data mining; – Disaster and Contingency Response Planning; – Information Sssurance; – Environmental Strategies – Environmental Technology; – Enterprise Systems Management; and, – Wireless Integration.

SRA INTERNATIONAL INC. ORIONMagic ®

– –

Circa: 2002

IN-Q-TEL

Investments –

Portfolio Of Companies ( 2002 ) – Partial List

ARCSIGHT [ http://www.arcsight.com ] ( Security Management Software for The Enterprise )

ArcSight, founded in May 2000, is located in the heart of Silicon Valley, California ( USA ).

ArcSight is a leading supplier of enterprise software that provides the security “air traffic control system” for large, geographically dispersed organizations. These organizations are augmenting their network infrastructure with a wide variety of security devices such as firewalls, intrusion detection and identity management systems that produce a barrage of uncoordinated alarms and alerts that overwhelm the security staff.

With its ‘centralized view’ of ‘all security activity’ combined with ‘real time analysis’ of ‘events’, by both ‘operating at the perimeter and inside’ the organization, ArcSight provides a ‘single solution’, for:

Event capture; Log aggregation; Real time correlation; Incident investigation; and, Reporting.

ArcSight ‘separates’, the ‘true threats and attacks’ from the ‘millions of false alarms and non-threatening activities’ that occur each day, focusing attention and resources on high-priority problems.

The company has delivered enterprise, ‘security management solutions’ to leading ‘financial services’, ‘government’ and ‘manufacturing’ organizations while ‘attracting capital’ from ‘leading investors’, such as:

IN-Q-TEL; KLEINER PERKINS CAUFIELD & BYERS ( KPCB ); and, SUMITOMO CORPORATION.

ATTENSITY CORPORATION [ http://www.attensity.com ] ( Text Extraction for Threat Detection )

Attensity Corp., founded in 2000, is a privately held company with dual headquarters in Mountain View, California ( USA ) and Salt Lake City, Utah ( USA ).

Attensity Corp. provides enterprise, ‘analytic software’ and ‘services’, to:

Government agencies; and,

Fortune 500 companies.

Attensity has developed breakthrough text extraction technology that transforms information captured in free form text into structured, relational data.

Attensity enables government agencies to dramatically expand their analytical capabilities in the area of ‘threat detection’ by, powering:

Link analysis; Trending; Exception reporting; Other advanced analytics; and, Knowledge management applications.

Attensity technology is the culmination of nearly a decade [ 10-years ] of research in computational linguistics.

Attensity Corporation customers include:

IN-Q-TEL, a strategic venture group funded by the CIA; WHIRLPOOL; and, JOHN DEERE.

ATTENSITY CORPORATION investor, is:

IN-Q-TEL

BROWSE3D [ http://www.browse3d.com ] ( Advanced Web Navigation )

BROWSE3D, founded in 2000, is located in the Dulles Technology Corridor of northern Virgina.

The company’s first Knowledge Management product, the Browse3D Browser, enables Internet users to browse Web sites using a dynamic, interactive, 3 dimensional ( 3-D ) display environment.

One year later [ 2001 ] the Browse3D Browser was recognized as the Best Internet Software of 2001 at the COMDEX Fall Technology Show ( Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ).

Browse3D launched its ‘consumer product’ in January 2002.

For the past 2-years [ since 2000 ], Browse3D has been working to re-invent the online researcher’s tool set. A researcher’s ability to ‘harvest relevant online data’ is often limited by the tools available to view that data.

Future products and technologies promise additional improvements in the way users ‘find’, ‘organize’, ‘save’ and ‘exchange’ web-based ‘content’.

BROWSE3D early-stage venture funding provided, by:

IN-Q-TEL; and, angel investors.

CANDERA INC. [ http://www.candera.com ] ( Enterprise Storage )

Candera Incorporated, founded in 2000, is a development stage stealth mode company headquartered in Milpitas, California ( USA ).

Candera Inc. is developing a new generation, purpose built, network based storage management platform that gives businesses unprecedented ‘control over’ and ‘visibility into’ their networked storage environments.

With the Candera Confluence solution, businesses can dramatically improve the utilization of their existing heterogeneous storage assets by consolidating them into a centrally managed storage pool. These can then be quickly and dynamically allocated to meet the needs of current and future network based applications, giving large enterprises a strategic advantage.

Candera is building the first [ 1st ] system, of a new generation of systems, that will enable customers to unleash the ultimate value of networked information storage.

CONVERA [ http://www.convera.com ] ( Mission Critical Enterprise Search and Categorization Software )

Convera RetrievalWare is a high-performance intelligent search system that allows broad flexibility and scalability for implementation across corporate intranets and extranets, enabling users to index and search a wide range of distributed information resources, including text files, HTML, XML, over 200 proprietary document formats, relational database tables, document management systems and groupware repositories. Convera RetrievalWare excels in distributed client environments and server environments with hundreds or thousands of users, documents, images and / or multiple media assets.

Advanced search capabilities include concept and keyword searching, pattern searching and query by example.

Convera is a leading provider of enterprise mission-critical ‘search’, ‘retrieval’ and ‘categorizing’ solutions.

More than 800 customers – in 33 countries – rely on Convera search solutions to power a broad range of mission critical applications, including enterprise:

Portals; Knowledge management; Intelligence gathering; Profiling; Corporate policy compliance; Regulatory compliance; Customer service; and, More.

DECRU [ http://www.decru.com ] ( Secure Networked Storage )

Decru, founded in April 2001, is headquartered in Redwood City, California ( USA ).

Decru solves the problem of secure data storage with a robust, wire-speed encryption appliance that fits transparently into any SAN or NAS storage environment, protecting data from both internal and external threats.

Markets include essentially any organization with a need to protect proprietary or confidential information ( e.g. government, technology, financial services, health care ).

Investors, include:

IN-Q-TEL; NEA; GREYLOCK; and, BENCHMARK.

GRAVITRON [ http://www.graviton.com ] ( Early Warning Detection and Notification System for Homeland Security Over Wireless Mesh Networks )

GRAVITON, founded in 1999, is located in La Jolla, California, USA.

Solomon Trujillo, former head of U.S. WEST ( baby bell telephone company ), leads GRAVITRON.

GRAVITON is on leading edge of a fledgling ( small ) industry, known as:

Machine to Machine Communications ( M2M ).

GRAVITON is developing an advanced integrated wireless sensor platform uniquely optimized for large-scale distributed sensor network applications working with Micro Electro Mechanical Systems ( MEMS ) sensor and spread spectrum wireless technologies licensed exclusively to GRAVITON from the U.S. National Laboratory at Oakridge ( also known as ) Oakridge National Laboratory ( Tennessee, USA ) – managed by the U.S. Department of Energy ( DOE ).

GRAVITON products and solutions integrate wireless, sensor and data management technology enabling enterprises to efficiently and transparently monitor, control, send, receive, and update system information from devices anywhere in the world.

GRAVITON is supported and funded by a number of corporate partners and investors, including:

IN-Q-TEL; GLOBAL CROSSING; ROYAL DUTCH SHELL ( oil / petroleum ); MITSUI; SIEMENS; QUALCOM; OMRON; MOTOROLA; and, SUN MICROSYSTEMS.

GRAVITON ‘primary’ financial investors, include:

MERRILL LYNCH;

GRAVITON ‘venture capital’ firms, include:

KLEINER PERKINS CAUFIELD & BYERS ( KPCB ); and, EARLYBIRD.

INTELLISEEK [ http://www.intelliseek.com ] ( Enterprise Intelligence Solutions )

INTELLISEEK, founded in 1997, has since 1998 been changing the way organizations ‘understand’, ‘gather’ and ‘use’ enterprise ‘intelligence’.

INTELLISEEK ‘knowledge discovery tools’ [ as of: 2002 ] enable the nation’s largest enterprises with up-to-the-minute consumer, industry information and ‘competitive intelligence’.

INTELLISEEK ‘Enterprise Search Server’™ ( ESS ) search platform provides a suite of intelligent applications that automate ‘knowledge discovery’ and ‘knowledge aggregation’ from hundreds of disparate, and often hard-to-locate data sources.

INTELLISEEK ‘Knowledge Management’ and ‘Search and Discovery’ solutions solve the fundamental problem of “information overload” by identifying and searching relevant, targeted and personalized content from the internet, intranets and extranets.

INTELLISEEK clients, include:

FORD MOTOR COMPANY ( FOMOCO ); NOKIA; and, PROCTOR AND GAMBLE.

Investors include:

IN-Q-TEL; FORD VENTURES; RIVER CITIES CAPITAL; GENERAL ATLANTIC PARTNERS LLC; FLAT IRON PARTNERS; BLUE CHIP VENTURE COMPANY; NOKIA VENTURES; and, Other private investors.

METACARTA [ http://www.metacarta.com ] ( Geospatial Data Fusion )

MetaCarta, established in 1999, was launched on more than $1,000,000 million in funding from the U.S. Department Of Defense ( DOD ) Defense Advanced Projects Agency ( DARPA ) and private investors.

MetaCarta CEO John Frank, with a doctorate from the Massachusets Institute Of Technology ( MIT ) where during 1999 – as a Hertz Fellow in physics working on a PhD – conceived a new way to view – geographically – ‘collections of text’ that later saw MetaCarta combine his interests in algorithms, information design, and scientific models of real world phenomena.

Metacarta provides a new knowledge management platform that integrates ‘text data with geography’ providing a ‘cohesive system’ for ‘problem solving’.

METACARTA Geographic Text Search ( GTS ) appliance, the software solution, redefines how people interact with information, enabling analysts to view text reports and geographic information in one ( 1 ) logical view through integration of text and geography delivering new information not obtainable from any other source.

MetaCarta CEO John Frank graduated from Yale University.

MOHOMINE [ http://www.mohomine.com ] ( Transforming Unstructured Multi-Language Data Into Actionable Information )

MOHOMINE, founded in 1999, is privately-held and located in San Diego, California, USA.

MOHOMINE technology has been deployed by United States national security organizations.

MOHOMINE mohoClassifier for National Security Organizations ™ reviews ‘text information’ in ‘cables’, ‘e-mails’, ‘system files’, ‘intranets’, ‘extranets’ and ‘internet’ providing ‘automated document classification’, ‘routing’ – based upon ‘learn-by-example pattern recognition’ technology – and ‘reports’ on user defined properties such as ‘topic’, ‘subject’, ‘tone’ ( ‘urgent’, plus others ), ‘author’, ‘source’ ( geographic locations, ‘country’, etc. ), and more.

MOHOMINE mohoClassifier users can easily set up ‘filters’ to automatically ‘identify’ and ‘prioritize’ ( ‘read first’ requirement ) documents that are quickly processed – out-of large volumes of other data – and then quickly route prioritized information to quickly reach the proper people.

MOHOMINE, from Global 5000, currently [ since 2002 ] has more than one hundred fifty ( 150 ) customers across numerous vertical industries, including:

CITICORP; WELLS FARGO; INTEL; TEXAS INSTRUMENTS; PFIZER; BOEING; ORACLE; PEOPLESOFT; and, NIKE.

MOHOMINE investors, include:

IN-Q-TEL; HAMILTON APEX TECHNOLOGY VENTURES; and, WINDWARD VENTURES.

QYNERGY CORPORATION [ http://www.qynergy.com ] ( Long-Lasting Power Solutions For Multiple Applications And Small-Tech )

QYNERGY CORP., founded in 2001, is located in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

QYNERGY technology originated at the U.S. National Laboratory at Sandia ( also known as ) Sandia National Laboratories ( New Mexico, USA ) and at the University of New Mexico ( New Mexico, USA ).

QYNERGY Corp. develops leading-edge energy solutions based on QYNERGY proprietary QynCell ™ technology that made an exciting breakthrough – over other ‘battery’ or ‘portable energy’ devices – in ‘materials science’ allowing QYNERGY to possess several unique competitive advantages.

QYNERGY QynCell ™ is an ‘electrical energy device’ revolution, providing:

Long-lived Batteries – QynCell usable life is potentially over a period of ‘several decades’ ( 10-year multiples ), during which time the QynCell device ‘does not require external charging’;

Miniature and Micro Applications – QynCell™ technology is scaleable, thus can be ‘miniaturized’, for:

Micro Electro Mechanical Systems ( MEMS ); MicroPower™ applications; Small microelectronics; and, Power-on-a-chip applications.

SAFEWEB [ http://www.safewebinc.com ] ( Secure Remote Access )

SAFEWEB, established in April 2000, is based in Emeryville, California, USA.

SAFEWEB built the world’s largest ‘online privacy network’, however in 2001 its ‘free online service’ was ‘concluded’ – to focus on developing its ‘enterprise’ product.

SAFEWEB is a leading provider of innovative security and privacy technologies that are effective, economical and simple.

SAFEWEB Secure Extranet Appliance ( SEA ), the first [ 1st ] SAFEWEB enterprise security release – reduces the cost and complexity traditionally involved in securing corporate network resources.

SAFEWEB Secure Extranet Appliance ( SEA ), named Tsunami, is a fundamental ‘redesign of extranet architecture’ integrating disparate technologies into a ‘modular plug-in network appliance’ ( SEA Tsunami).

SAFEWEB SEA Tsunami is an ‘all-in-one solution’ simplifying implementation of ‘extranets’ and ‘Virtual Private Networks’ ( VPN ) reducing Total Cost of Ownership ( TCO ) by innovative architecture letting companies build – in less than 1-hour – ‘secure extranets’ providing ‘remote stationed’ enablement of ‘employees’, ‘clients’ and ‘partners’ to access ‘internal applications’ and ‘secure data’ from anywhere using a standard internet website browser.

SAFEWEB delivers, through established strategic partnerships, customized versions of its Secure Extranet Appliance ( SEA ) Tsunami technology to U.S. intelligence [ CIA, etc. ] and communications agencies [ NSA, etc. ].

SAFEWEB investors, include:

IN-Q-TEL; CHILTON INVESTMENTS; and, KINGDON CAPITAL.

STRATIFY INCORPORATED [  ] ( Unstructured Data Management Software )

In 1999, PURPLE YOGI was founded by former INTEL Microcomputer Research Laboratory scientists Ramana Venkata and Ramesh Subramonian.

PURPLE YOGI, became known as STRATIFY INCORPORATED ( a privately-held company ).

In early 2001, ORACLE CORPORATION veteran and senior executive Nimish Mehta became president and chief executive officer ( CEO ).

STRATIFY INC., headquartered in Mountain View, California ( USA ), is [ 2002 ] the ‘emerging’ leader in ‘unstructured data management’ software.

STRATIFY Discovery System is a ‘complete enterprise software platform’ helping todays [ 2002 ] organizations ‘harness vast information overload’ by ‘automating the process’ of ‘organizing’, ‘classifying’ and ‘presenting’ business-critical unstructured information usually found in ‘documents’, ‘presentations’ and internet website pages.

STRATIFY Discovery System platform ‘transforms unstructured internal and external data’ into ‘immediately accessible relevant information’ automatically organizing millions of documents displayed in easy navigational hierarchy.

STRATIFY INC. clients, include:

INLUMEN and INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, named in 2001 as one ( 1 ) of The Red Herring 100.

STRATIFY INC. received funding, from:

IN-Q-TEL; H & Q AT INDIA (also known as ) H & Q ASIA PACIFIC; SOFTBANK VENTURE CAPITAL ( now known as ) MOBIUS VENTURE CAPITAL; SKYBLAZE VENTURES LLC; and, INTEL CAPITAL.

SRD [ http://www.srdnet.com ] ( Near Real Time Data Warehousing and Link Analysis )

SYSTEMS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ( SRD ), founded in 1983, develops software applications to combat fraud, theft, and collusion.

SYSTEMS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT Non-Obvious Relationship Awareness ™ ( NORA ™ ) was originally developed for the gambling casino gaming industry

SYSTEMS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT NORA software is designed to identify correlations across vast amounts of structured data, from hundreds or thousands of data sources, in near real-time, and alert users to potentially harmful relationships between and among people.

SRD NORA software technology leverages SYSTEMS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT proven expertise in ‘aggregating’, ‘warehousing’ and ‘leveraging people data’ and ‘transaction data’ to strengthen corporate management and security systems.

SYSTEMS RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT clients [ 2002 ], include:

U.S. Depaartment of Defense ( DOD ); CENDANT; TARGET; MGM MIRAGE; MANDALAY BAY RESORT GROUP; and, Food Marketing Institute.

TACIT [ http://www.tacit.com ] ( Enterprise Expertise Automation )

TACIT, founded in 1997, is located in Palo Alto, California ( USA ) with regional sales offices in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Illinois.

David Gilmour serves as president and chief executive officer ( CEO ).

TACIT Knowledge Systems is the pioneer and leader in ‘Enterprise Expertise Automation’.

TACIT products ‘automatically and continuously inventories’ the ‘skills’ and ‘work focus’ of an ‘entire organization’ for ‘dynamic location’ of ‘connections to expertise needed’ – when needed to make decisions, solve problems, and serve customers.

TACIT products also include its award winning flagship product KnowledgeMail™. In June 200, TACIT was voted one of the “Hot 100 Private Companies,” by Upside Magazine.

In 2000 and 2001, TACIT was one ( 1 ) of the “100 Companies that Matter,” by KM World [ Knowledge Management World ].

TACIT attracted a ‘world class advisory board’ with interest from ‘venture capital’ and Fortune 500 ‘clients’ of ‘enterprise’ and ‘customers’, including:

IN-Q-TEL; JP MORGAN; CHEVRON-TEXACO ( petroleum and chemical ); UNISYS; HEWLETT-PACKARD; NORTHROP-GRUMAN ( aerospace & defense ); and, ELI LILLY ( pharmaceuticals ).

TACIT investors, include:

IN-Q-TEL; DRAPER FISHER JURVETSON; REUTERS GREENHOUSE FUND; and, ALTA PARTNERS.

TRACTION SOFTWARE [ http://www.tractionsoftware.com ] ( Harvest and Use Information from All Sources )

TRACTION SOFTWARE, founded in 1996, is located in Providence, Rhode Island ( USA ).

TRACTION® Software is the leader in ‘Enterprise Weblog’ software, bringing together working ‘communications’, ‘knowledge management’, ‘content management’, ‘collaboration’, and the ‘writable intranet portal’.

TRACTION TeamPage™ product addresses the need for ‘unified on-demand view’ of ‘team content’ and ‘team communication’ from ‘all document sources’ in ‘context’ and over ‘time’.

TRACTION TeamPage deploys quickly and easily on an existing network and delivers a ‘capstone communication system’ by turning ‘e-mail’ and ‘web browser’ into powerful tools for end-users.

TeamPage targets ‘program teams’ and ‘product management teams’ in ‘government’ and ‘business’.

TRACTION also supports a wide range of applications and business processes, including but not limited, to:

Business Intelligence and Market Research;

Collection Highlighting and Media Distribution;

Investor Relations E-Mail and Public Relations E-Mail Triage and Response; and,

Tracking Exception Process and Reporting Exception Process.

TRACTION SOFTWARE investors, include:

IN-Q-TEL; SLATER CENTER FOR INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGY; and, private investors.

ZAPLET INCORPORATED [ http://www.zaplet.com ] ( Enterprise Collaboration Tools For Email )

ZAPLET INC., founded in 1999, is located in Redwood Shores, California ( USA ).

ZAPLET INC. is an enterprise software and services company and creator of the Zaplet Appmail System™ collaboration software that brings application functionality directly to a user’s inbox to complete business processes.

ZAPLET INC. Appmail, using a server-based platform, combines power, ‘centralized control’ and ‘robust security’ for traditional enterprise application systems with the convenience and ease-of-use of e-mail.

ZAPLET Appmail in-box becomes the gateway to a protected server where the application functionality and data securely reside.

Zaplet™ Appmail can be used, to:

Manage and Streamline mission-critical business processes; Requires no additional client-side upgrades; and, Instantly expandable for work teams ‘beyond’ the ‘enterprise’.

ZAPLET INC. has received numerous awards, including:

Red Herring 100; Enterprise Outlook – Investors’ Choice; and, Internet Outlook – Investors’ Choice.

ZAPLET INC. customers, include leading companies, in:

Finance; Telecommunication; High technologies; and, Government.

ZAPLET INC. is backed by world class investors, including:

KLEINER PERKINS CAUFIELD & BYERS ( KPCB ); ACCENTURE TECHNOLOGY VENTURES; QUESTMARK PARTNERS L.P.; RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED ( RIM ); INTEGRAL CAPITAL PARTNERS; ORACLE CORPORATION; CISCO SYSTEMS INC.; and, NOVELL INC.

– –

Circa: 2010

IN-Q-TEL

Investments –

Portfolio of Companies ( 2010 ) – Partial List

3VR Security AdaptivEnergy Adapx Arcxis Asankya Basis Technology Bay Microsystems CallMiner Cambrios Carnegie Speech CleverSafe ( SAIC ) CopperEye Destineer Elemental Technlogies Ember Corporation Endeca Etherstack FEBIT FireEye FluiDigm

Reference(s)

http://web.archive.org/web/20020630223724/http://www.inqtel.com/news/attachments/InQTelInvestmentPortfolio.pdf http://www.iqt.org/technology-portfolio/orionmagic.html http://defense-ventures.com/in-q-tel/

– – – –

Research References

“Information Technology Trends And Their Impact On CIA,” January 1999, declassified report of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency by, CIA Chief Information Officer.

– – – –

 

Submitted for review and commentary by,

 

Concept Activity Research Vault ( CARV ), Host
E-MAIL: ConceptActivityResearchVault@Gmail.Com
WWW: http://ConceptActivityResearchVault.WordPress.Com

/

/