Within Anomaly Tests
Does Cutler's Absence Rule Out the MJ 12 Memo?
Cutler being overseas makes the disputed memorandum harder to explain, but an unsigned staff-prepared paper remains logically possible.
On this page
- Where Cutler was when the memorandum was dated
- Who was handling NSC business in his absence
- Why suspicious circumstances are not impossibility
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
The fact that Robert Cutler was abroad on 14 July 1954 is one of the clearest problems with the alleged Cutler–Twining MJ-12 memorandum, but it is not quite the automatic disproof it can appear to be. Archival records cited by the US National Archives place Cutler on an official tour of military installations in Europe and North Africa from 3 to 15 July. The disputed memorandum is dated 14 July and carries his typed name and title. Cutler therefore was not in Washington when the paper was supposedly produced.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024
That matters because Cutler had explicitly delegated National Security Council (NSC) administrative business during his absence. Yet it also exposes the limit of the argument: the surviving MJ-12 paper is unsigned. Physical absence can rule out Cutler personally typing or signing a Washington document that day; it cannot, by itself, rule out a subordinate preparing an unsigned memorandum in his name. The stronger question is whether the document behaves as an authentic piece of delegated NSC correspondence should.
Where Cutler was on 14 July 1954
There is little serious room for dispute about Cutler’s absence. According to the National Archives’ MJ-12 reference report, President Dwight D. Eisenhower had sent Cutler to inspect overseas military installations. A memorandum and report preserved in Eisenhower’s presidential papers, dated 20 July 1954 after Cutler’s return, records visits to installations in Europe and North Africa between 3 and 15 July. The alleged memorandum to General Nathan Twining falls almost at the end of that period, on 14 July.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024
The chronology is strengthened by another contemporary record. Before leaving, Cutler wrote a 3 July memorandum to two NSC subordinates, Executive Secretary James S. Lay Jr and J. Patrick Coyne, giving them instructions for handling administrative matters while he was away. The National Archives consequently regarded Cutler’s whereabouts not as an inference reconstructed from a vague itinerary but as an absence documented in the records of the office itself.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024
This creates an immediate authenticity problem for the Cutler–Twining memorandum. A document dated in Washington during an official’s recorded overseas absence deserves an explanation, especially when it appears under that official’s name. But precisely what the absence proves depends on what is being claimed about authorship. A typed name at the foot of an unsigned office memorandum does not necessarily establish that the named official personally composed, dictated, approved or dispatched it.
That distinction is particularly important here because the alleged document does not contain Cutler’s handwritten signature. MJ-12 defender Stanton Friedman made this a central part of his rebuttal: Cutler could not have signed a Washington memorandum while overseas, but staff remaining at the NSC could conceivably have produced routine correspondence for his office. Friedman pointed specifically to Cutler’s instructions to Lay as evidence that business was supposed to continue during the trip.[Medium]medium.comUPDATE ON OPERATION MAJESTIC 12 DOCUMENTS | by Richard Geldreich, Jr. | Physicist Stanton Friedman’s Articles | MediumJune 28, 2024…
Who was handling NSC business in his absence
The archival evidence actually makes the delegated-authorship hypothesis both more plausible in principle and more difficult in practice.
On the plausible side, James S. Lay was no incidental clerk. He was the NSC’s Executive Secretary, a senior institutional figure whose tenure in that position ran from 1950 to 1961. Contemporary NSC material routinely shows Lay transmitting memoranda and Council business. Cutler’s decision to leave administrative instructions with Lay and Coyne therefore establishes a genuine mechanism through which work could continue while Cutler was overseas.[Office of the Historian]history.state.gov22, Executive Secretary of the National Security Council James S. Lay, Jr., transmitted a memorandum to the NSC which stated…Read more…
That is enough to defeat the simplest version of the argument: “Cutler was in Europe, therefore no genuine memorandum connected with Cutler’s office could have been produced in Washington.” Government offices do not stop operating whenever their principals travel. Staff prepare correspondence, circulate decisions and handle delegated business.
The National Archives nevertheless drew a more specific inference. Given Cutler’s 3 July instructions, its reference report observed that if the Twining memorandum were genuine, one would expect Lay or Coyne to have signed it. That is an expectation about administrative practice rather than proof of physical impossibility. The wording matters: the archival finding supplies a reason for suspicion, not evidence that delegation could never occur in another form.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024
A particularly useful counterpoint comes from sceptic Philip J. Klass. Writing in Skeptical Inquirer, Klass reported that the Eisenhower Library held another Top Secret memorandum dated 14 July 1954 that Lay sent to the Secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission under Lay’s own name. He argued that this contemporary example weakened Friedman’s proposal that Lay might simply have issued the MJ-12 memorandum under Cutler’s name.[Skeptical Inquirer]skepticalinquirer.orgSkeptical InquirerSkeptical InquirerJune 26, 2006 —… President Eisenhower's special assistant, Robert Cutler. Moore and… written by…
That comparison is more probative than Cutler’s absence alone. It asks not merely whether Lay could transact business during Cutler’s trip, but how Lay actually identified himself in classified correspondence on the very day in question. Still, one example cannot establish an exceptionless rule. To turn the point into a conclusive falsifier would require showing that NSC practice required delegated correspondence of this kind to bear Lay’s or Coyne’s name and that no authorised alternative existed.
Why suspicious circumstances are not impossibility
The Cutler problem is best understood by separating three propositions that are sometimes treated as though they were identical.
Cutler was outside the United States on 14 July. This is strongly documented. His post-trip report covers Europe and North Africa from 3 to 15 July, and his pre-departure instructions confirm that he expected subordinates to handle NSC administration during his absence.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024
Cutler therefore did not personally sign the alleged memorandum in Washington that day. That conclusion is straightforward, but the surviving disputed paper is unsigned. There is no Cutler signature whose physical execution on 14 July needs explaining. Friedman correctly identified this narrow logical limitation in the absence argument, irrespective of whether his broader case for MJ-12 authenticity is persuasive.[Medium]medium.comUPDATE ON OPERATION MAJESTIC 12 DOCUMENTS | by Richard Geldreich, Jr. | Physicist Stanton Friedman’s Articles | MediumJune 28, 2024…
The memorandum therefore cannot be genuine. This does not follow from absence alone. A staff member could theoretically have prepared an unsigned paper carrying the principal’s typed name, perhaps pursuant to earlier instructions or a decision communicated while the principal was away. Friedman’s proposed candidate was Lay, and he further argued that Lay was in contact with Eisenhower during Cutler’s absence. Those claims offer a possible administrative mechanism, but possibility is not evidence that this is what happened.[The Black Vault]theblackvault.comThe Black Vault Update on Operation Majestic 12 DocumentsThe Black VaultUpdate on Operation Majestic 12 Documents - The Black Vault Case Files…
The distinction cuts both ways. MJ-12 advocates cannot authenticate the document merely by showing that delegated authorship was conceivable. Once the normal-looking chain has been disrupted — the named official was abroad, the paper is unsigned, and contemporary archival investigators expected a subordinate to have signed in his place — the burden shifts towards finding positive evidence of who prepared or authorised the memorandum. No such provenance is supplied by Cutler’s absence itself.
Nor does the fact that Lay was conducting genuine NSC business on 14 July solve the problem. Indeed, Klass’s same-day comparison sharpens it: Lay demonstrably produced classified correspondence under his own name while Cutler was away. That does not make a Cutler-name memorandum impossible, but it means the proposed staff-authorship explanation requires an additional exception rather than following automatically from known office practice.[Skeptical Inquirer]skepticalinquirer.orgSkeptical InquirerSkeptical InquirerJune 26, 2006 —… President Eisenhower's special assistant, Robert Cutler. Moore and… written by…
What the absence actually proves
For evaluating the alleged MJ-12 documents, Cutler’s whereabouts should therefore be treated as strong adverse evidence rather than a standalone falsification test. The archival chronology securely establishes an awkward fact that any authenticity theory must explain. It also identifies the people — principally Lay and Coyne — through whom a genuine NSC administrative memorandum might have been generated in Cutler’s absence.[National Archives]archives.govNational Archives Project BLUE BOOKNational ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024
The National Archives’ interpretation is the more suspicious one: Cutler was overseas, had formally arranged for subordinates to handle business, and an authentic memorandum would therefore be expected to show their involvement. The same-day Lay memorandum reported by Klass adds concrete support for expecting Lay to use his own name.[Skeptical Inquirer]skepticalinquirer.orgSkeptical InquirerSkeptical InquirerJune 26, 2006 —… President Eisenhower's special assistant, Robert Cutler. Moore and… written by…
The opposing interpretation identifies a real but narrower point. An unsigned carbon or office copy cannot safely be treated as proof that the person whose name appears at the bottom personally authored or signed it. Government correspondence can be staff-produced, and Cutler had unquestionably delegated work before leaving. Thus, “Cutler could not have written this in Washington” is considerably stronger than “Cutler’s office could not have issued anything like this while he was away”.
That distinction is important because document authentication is strongest when it separates impossibility from improbability. Had the disputed memorandum carried a demonstrably contemporaneous handwritten Cutler signature executed in Washington on 14 July, his documented presence overseas would pose a much harder contradiction. Instead, the actual anomaly is administrative: an unsigned memorandum bearing the absent official’s name survives without the staff signature that archivists expected and without evidence identifying a substitute author.
Cutler’s absence consequently deepens the authenticity problem without resolving it on its own. It narrows the range of plausible explanations and makes personal authorship highly implausible, but it leaves staff preparation logically open. The decisive issue is not simply where Robert Cutler was; it is whether the disputed paper has independent evidence connecting it to the people and procedures that were actually running NSC business while he was gone.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Does Cutler's Absence Rule Out the MJ 12 Memo?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
The Demon-haunted World
Rating: 4.5/5 from 43 Google Books ratings
Are we on the brink of a new Dark Age of irrationality and superstition? In this book, the writer shows how scientific thinking is necess...
UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Re...
NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • Impeccably researched, this riveting journalistic investigation separates fact from fiction, and documents th...
The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry
Cited by the New York Review of Books as "the best brief for visitation," this classic study presents an analysis of UFO reports and conc...
The Craft of Research
Rating: 4.3/5 from 6 Google Books ratings
Since 1995, students, researchers, and professionals have turned to The Craft of Research for clear and helpful guidance on how to conduc...
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromUFO poster oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: archives.gov
Title: National Archives Project BLUE BOOK
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/military/[air-force
Source snippet
National ArchivesProject BLUE BOOK - Unidentified Flying Objects | National ArchivesJune 25, 2024...
Published: June 25, 2024
2.
Source: medium.com
Link:https://medium.com/stanton-friedmans-articles/update-on-operation-majestic-12-documents-ed2df58fd8a1
Source snippet
UPDATE ON OPERATION MAJESTIC 12 DOCUMENTS | by Richard Geldreich, Jr. | Physicist Stanton Friedman’s Articles | MediumJune 28, 2024...
Published: June 28, 2024
3.
Source: medium.com
Link:https://medium.com/stanton-friedmans-articles/book-review-kevin-d-randles-case-mj-12-the-true-story-behind-the-government-s-ufo-conspiracies-9e06f4e82250
4.
Source: archives.gov
Link:https://www.archives.gov/research/foreign-policy/cold-war/ref-info-paper-107
5.
Source: clintonwhitehouse4.archives.gov
Link:https://clintonwhitehouse4.archives.gov/WH/EOP/NSC/html/NSChistory.html
6.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogJplVuElLs
Source snippet
Majestic 12 | Secret Documents Expose UFO Cover-Up Vol. 1...
7.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Majestic 12 | Secret Documents Expose UFO Cover-Up Vol. 1
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9VoC8MoeUs
Source snippet
Top Secret / MAJIC By Stanton T. Friedman - A Detailed Investigation into the MJ-12 UFO Documents...
8.
Source: theblackvault.com
Title: The Black Vault Update on Operation Majestic 12 Documents
Link:https://www.theblackvault.com/casefiles/update-on-operation-majestic-12-documents/
Source snippet
The Black VaultUpdate on Operation Majestic 12 Documents - The Black Vault Case Files...
9.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v02p1/d117
Source snippet
22, Executive Secretary of the National Security Council James S. Lay, Jr., transmitted a memorandum to the NSC which stated...Read more...
10.
Source: skepticalinquirer.org
Link:https://skepticalinquirer.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2019/03/Issue-03-9.pdf
Source snippet
Skeptical InquirerSkeptical InquirerJune 26, 2006 —... President Eisenhower's special assistant, Robert Cutler. Moore and... written by...
Published: June 26, 2006
11.
Source: glialienitranoi.it
Title: MAJESTI C 12
Link:https://www.glialienitranoi.it/majestic-12/
12.
Source: lurch2.blogspot.com
Title: majestic 12
Link:https://lurch2.blogspot.com/2013/09/majestic-12.html
13.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v13p2/d815
14.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v13p2/d802
15.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v16/ch4
16.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1950-55Intel/ch1?start=151
17.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v16/ch4
18.
Source: fr.scribd.com
Title: Majestic 12
Link:https://fr.scribd.com/document/1606041/Majestic-12
19.
Source: col2.com
Title: operation majestic 12
Link:https://www.col2.com/operation-majestic-12
20.
Source: nationalarchives.gov.uk
Title: foreign office and foreign and commonwealth office correspondence 1920 onwards
Link:https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/foreign-office-and-foreign-and-commonwealth-office-correspondence-1920-onwards/
21.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v05p2/d149
22.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v13p2/d1080fn5
23.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v13p2/d1080
24.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v13p2/d1080
25.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v01p2/d127
26.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v16/d619
27.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v16/d619fn2
28.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v12p1/d192
29.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v13p2/d819fn3
30.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v13p2/d819fn4
31.
Source: history.state.gov
Link:https://history.state.gov//historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v15p1/d483
Additional References
32.
Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp90-00708r000300040001-2
Source snippet
THE DCI HISTORICAL SERIES CIA SUPPORT FUNCTIONS13 and 14). 15 JAN. NSC staff changes: James S. Lay, Jr., succeeds Sidney W. Souers as...
33.
Source: cdn.centerforinquiry.org
Link:https://cdn.centerforinquiry.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/1988/04/22165257/p57.pdf
Source snippet
Center for InquiryThe MJ-12 Papers: Part 2Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, written by James Lay on the...
34.
Source: cufos.org
Link:https://cufos.org/PDFs/IUR%20issues/IUR%20Vol.%2013%20No.%203%20May-June%201988.pdf
Source snippet
Center for UFO StudiesMystery of the circlesmention to James Lay and J. Patrick Coyne... aftemoon of July 14, 1954-the date of the CT me...
Published: July 14, 1954
35.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Top Secret / MAJIC By Stanton T. Friedman
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Je48I-xNjY
Source snippet
Majestic 12 [Cutler Twining memo]({{ 'cutler-memo/' | relative_url }}) National Archives The Majestic-12 Documents [With Ryan S. Wood]...
36.
Source: cia.gov
Link:https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp64b00346r000500030098-1
37.
Source: trumanlibrary.gov
Link:https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/photograph-records/59-110
38.
Source: eisenhowerlibrary.gov
Link:https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/research/online-documents/world-war-one
39.
Source: youtube.com
Title: The Majestic-12 Documents [With Ryan S. Wood]
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzB87RJkQVU
Source snippet
A secret history: Inside shadow intelligence, the MJ-12 documents | Reality Check...
40.
Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338711232_A_szovjet_ideologiai_befolyast_ellensulyozo_amerikai_oktatasi_programok
41.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/IkeLibrary/posts/70-years-ago-this-week-history-was-made-in-panama-on-july-21-23-1956-president-e/1637025121796852/