Ex-top defense official expects bombshell details of Pentagon UFO recovery
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I'll provide an update soon but I'll add this post. It's irrelevant that RTE is or isn't covering this and by this I mean yesterday's whistle-blower hearing involving pilots and David Grusch, the former intelligence officer.
Time Magazine feature this story.
Witness Tells Congress 'Nonhuman Biologics' Were Found at Alleged UFO Crash Sites
Aformer intelligence official claimed the U.S. government has been covering up a longstanding defense program that collects and reverse engineers unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and has found "nonhuman biologics" at alleged UFO crash sites.
The highly anticipated testimony from David Grusch, a former member of a U.S. Air Force panel on unidentified anomalous phenomena—also known as unidentified aerial phenomena—(UAP), was part of an effort by Congress to pressure intelligence agencies for more transparency into the existence of UFOs, a subject of heightened scrutiny following an increase in reported sightings by military personnel and pilots in recent years. Although extraterrestrial life has long been shrouded in stigma, confusion, and secrecy, lawmakers on both sides of the political spectrum have been rallying around the push for more research on the topic as a national security matter.
“UAPs, whatever they may be, may pose a serious threat to our military and our civilian aircraft, and that must be understood,” Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia of California said. “We should encourage more reporting, not less on UAPs. The more we understand, the safer we will be.”
Testifying under oath at a House subcommittee hearing on Wednesday, Grusch told lawmakers he believes the U.S. government is in possession of UAPs based on his interviews with 40 witnesses over four years, claiming that he was informed of "a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse-engineering program" during the course of his work examining classified programs. He said he was denied access to those programs when he requested it, and accused the military of misappropriating funds to shield these operations from congressional oversight.
Now we cannot say "ah good proof there's aliens" or "of course it's not aliens because there's no such thing as aliens".
Neither examples are how science works. The facts are:
- we're observing a phenomenon that has failed to correlate with mundane explanations
- That several former whistleblowers are coming forward with testimony of illegal special access programs (SAPs) which are being withheld from the normal Congressional oversight.
We lack the ability to ascertain the nature of the aerial phenomenon now. However, Congress should soon be getting access to the radar data, classified video data associated with these events. In yesterday's pilot testimony they described radar data that would give more accurate Kinemetrics of these objects. We need that. That won't tell us what these are but what the capabilities are.
The second claim is easier to prove. Why? It's because a matter of put up or shut up. The whistleblower claims here are a lot easier to verify. In the Congressional hearing Dave Grusch agreed to provide the exact names of people involved in these programs. He intimated that witnesses can be described as hostile or willing. He stated that he has received reprisals, both of a personal nature and against his career. He has provided documentation, the names of other witnesses, program names and locations to the inspector general of the intelligence community and adequately cleared Congress members. Finally, the whistleblower went through the recent whistleblower legislation and approached the intelligence community inspector general with the complaint that he has been the subject of reprisals for his complaint and that the US military and defense contractors are running SAPs from Congress without legal oversight. Here's a copy of his complaint.
Another poster earlier stated that the inspector general didn't find this credible like previously stated but that is erroneous. Compass Rose Legal Group, the lawyers who represented Mr Grusch made this statement:
“The ICIG found Mr. Grusch’s assertion that information was inappropriately concealed from Congress to be urgent and credible in response to the filed disclosure. Compass Rose brought this matter to the ICIG’s attention through lawful channels and successfully defended Mr. Grusch against retaliation.
David's complaint was found to be urgent and credible. Compass Rose Legal Group represent active service members. This no longer includes Mr. Grusch as he has left the intelligence community. However, Charles McCullough, Esq, the attorney who represented Dave when he was employed by the intelligence community has resigned from Compass Rose Legal Group to represent Grusch as a whistleblower complainant. What's more interesting is that McCullough is the former inspector general of the intelligence community. Referring to this as "just stories" is ridiculous and shows a lack of understanding of how government works.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
