Laying to rest, once and for all, the fake document….SOM 1-01 “Special Operations Manual”

Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 8.18.50 AM

SOM 1-01 was evaluated as a fake by reputable UFO researchers, including MUFON’s Richard H. Hall and Thomas P. Deuley:

“The SOM-01-1 manual arrived in the mail to Don Berliner as a roll of film form an anonymous source.  This immediately raises suspicions, since there is no identifiable source whose veracity and reputation can be checked and no original documents that can be subjected to forensic analysis.  We believe this to be a hoax document, a deliberate fake designed to mislead the public and to plant a false information in the UFO research community”:


Kirtland AFB, New Mexico

(Above, part of fake document:  SOM 1-01…..notice the clever mention of Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico…..a la modus operandi of Richard C. Doty)

(According to Caer Bannog, “Richard Doty was the front man.  He may not have been the actual author of the MJ-12 story or documents, and he denies being the source, however, he was the disseminator of it.  The first mention of Majestic 12 in history was from the faked documents Doty fed to Paul Bennewitz, which Doty admited were disinformation.”)




Please also click and read:  Albuquerque businessman Paul Bennewitz victimized by a “self-proclaimed” government UFO disinformation agent


(Above, part of fake document:  SOM 1-01……CONTENTS page)

Mention of Area 51 S-4

(Above, part of fake document:  SOM 1-01…….SOM 1-01, purportedly printed in April 1954, contains many flaws.  For example, it stated that crashed ET craft should be sent to “Area 51 S-4” in Nevada.  But that portion of Nellis Air Force Base was not given the name “Area 51” until several years after SOM 1-01 allegedly was printed.)



E-mail =

Facebook =


11 thoughts on “Laying to rest, once and for all, the fake document….SOM 1-01 “Special Operations Manual”

  1. The whole desert was already mapped off into sectors. It still is. They built the base in the piece of land which was named Area 51 and that is how it got its name. It was always called Area 51.


  2. But Stanton Friedman says it is an original document, not fraudulent thus creating an enigmatic piece to the puzzle. How can an original document from the US National Archives mention a section within the Nellis Air Force Gunnery and Bombing Range that did not exist for another year from the time of the document? Is it possible that someone within the military/government planning circle had already created numerical designations for the yet-to-be named areas? For instance, so although the area designated for project AQUATONE was not officially named “Paradise Ranch”, could it be possible that the numerical designations were already proposed and in place?

    I think that it is plausible.


  3. Here are a couple of more reasons why SOM 1-01 looks like a fake:
    1. The T.O. listed on the front cover, “12D1-3-11-1”, doesn’t exist. If it was an actual technical order, it would be an operation manual for an airborne electronic system. A Methods and Procedures manual would start with “00-” (Ref. AFTO 00-5-18).
    2. It doesn’t have the “look and feel” of a government document. For example, the paragraphs are numbered with single numbers that continue through the chapters. (Should be 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 etc.)


  4. T.O.’s are USAF technical orders.
    Also, numbering would go 1-1.1 a,b,c etc. til 2-1 and so on.
    Pages not classified will be marked so on top and below.
    The cover page isn’t correct either. Having top secret and eyes only and the rest of the stuff after that wouldn’t be plastered on the front as it is.
    Restricted on top and then Top Secret further down the page is wrong.
    Highest classification is to be on top of page; Top Secret Restricted.


  5. from one EBE hybrid… keep an open mind with first a closed mouth. and keep studying. EBE 04/22/1954 p.s. I still suffer from hemoptysis (regular epistaxis / nosebleeds from my intracranial modifications.
    p.s.s. – may you have your own experience, if that is what is required for your progressive knowledge to evolve only as rapidly as you can assimilate it without duress or stress. Relax You are among friends If not, there is no time like the present. Oh, and stay clear of Groom Lake (original correct name)


  6. There is nothing “laid to rest” or proven as “fake” or disinfo by this. Actually, many prominent ufologists including Linda Moulton Howe think it is genuine and not disinfo at all. The type used was confirmed as done by the actual type machine used by the government in those days. The initials on the sign-out pages correlate to the names of real military officials who were stationed at or had access to Kirtland at the time. People who say “well TO’s aren’t right” and it’s “not numbered correctly” have missed the bigger picture that a completely HIGHER-TIERED hidden group of individuals was in charge of putting things like this together, so it may not correspond to exact specs of “normal” top secret docs. This is beyond top secret if you weren’t aware. Also how is it less credible because the donor asked to be anonymous? If your literal life/career/pension was on the line, would you risk it all just to satisfy the “skeptic debunkers”? I doubt it. Some have, but it should surprise no one that a document like this wouldn’t be tied to an official military source.


  7. Also, let’s just break it down as simple as possible. Let’s say it is disinfo. Do you realize the amount of work that would go into producing this? What would that suggest about what they’re trying to hide or throw the scent off of, IF this document was disinfo? That’s a lot of work for something that’s a nothing. It makes more sense that it’s a real document to cover real scenarios that have been documented by some historians, of the literal dozens and dozens of UFO crash retrievals around the world (that the US is usually involved in).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s