BAASS Ten Month Report 2009 - Leaked Document

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
https://www.metabunk.org/f/BAASS_TEN_MONTH_REPORT_2009.pdf

This report details the activities of the Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS), and was leaked earlier today.
2025-06-01_10-53-55.jpg

Source: https://x.com/IWANTTOKNOWUK/status/1929093916017516991

Of interest, a propaganda project that reminds me of Scientology with its focus on celebrities. Maybe Tom DeLonge

External Quote:

Internet promotion: Several well known UAP Internet journalists and
bloggers will be approached and hired. BAASS can rapidly contact up to six
individuals who collectively are responsible for millions of Internet blog
postings.

Radio promotion: BAASS has access to several well known UAP-friendly
radio journalists, a couple of whom are celebrities in their own right.

Radio promotion: BAASS has access to several well known UAP-friendlyNewsprint promotion: The "UAP friendly" news media will be approached and utilized in order to promote the BAASS agenda through newspaper and
online articles. Again BAASS can contact over half a dozen well known UAP
journalists.

Television promotion: BAASS has discussed this with one well known TV
journalist who is also a celebrity is willing to commit to such a project.
Other TV journalists are in line for BAASS contacts.

Celebrities: BAASS senior analyst John Schuessler put together a list of
celebrities with a professed interest in the UAP topic. This list comprises
over twenty individuals that may be receptive to engagement.
 
Last edited:
Of interest, a propaganda project that reminds me of Scientology with its focus on celebrities. Maybe Tom DeLonge
This sounds exactly like what Eric Weinstein and Sam Harris talked about a few years ago. They both at the time had very popular podcasts (I think Eric has stopped producing his, and Sam's is still popular but my sense is it is not as popular as it used to be). Both Eric and Sam were very public about the fact that someone with DoD credentials that seemed legitimate reached out to them and told them they wanted their help in disseminating the news that extraterrestrials were visiting Earth. They both viewed it as credible, not just some random crackpot sending them an email, because of the seemingly legitimate DoD credentials. They both refused to give much detail though or say who it was that contacted them, and then it sort of just went away and nothing came of it.
 
2025-06-01_11-22-35.jpg


They had actual Pentagon clearances. The "Sponsor" is mentioned elsewhere as Lacatski at the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency)
External Quote:

Project Cooperation required the full cooperation between the DIA
sponsors and BAASS and lays out the expected frameworks and specifics of this
cooperation. This necessitated the help and cooperation from the DIA in assisting
BAASS to obtain the high value film, hardware, relevant materials and information
that are essential to the successful completion of this project.

...


Given NORAD's important status, BAASS agreed that it was a high
priority for the sponsor to approach NORAD with a view to obtaining any
data on JANAP 146 reports for the past decade from military pilots.
Accordingly, in March 2009, Dr J. Lacatski approached NORAD to inquire
about procedures for obtaining data on JANAP 146 reports. Dr. Lacatski was
told that no such data exists.
 
Geez...maybe if they ever had an actual, documented sighting that was worth a crap,
then such an extensive, expensive propaganda machine wouldn't be necessary...
 
Should note that Tim McMillan (now at The Debrief) first reported on this "BAASS 10-month report" back in 2020, where he showed a few images and cherry-picked select descriptions from it.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mi.../government-secret-ufo-program-investigation/

I always wondered how McMillan was able to get ahold of this mythical report. He later told me he was family friends with Jay Stratton, dating back pre-2017.
 
Note "Senior Analyst John Schuessler". He's the former MUFON director and one of his papers was in John Greenwald's FOIA dump that included the DIRD papers. UFO-Human Physiological Effects was Schuessler's catalog of cases that he wrote up in 1996 . I always wondered why it was included with the DIRDs, now maybe we know. In addition, he was BAASS's link to MUFON. BAASS gave MUFON $350k for the use of and tuning up of their database. It seems to be the only money trail from AAWSAP and BAASS.

Of interest, a propaganda project that reminds me of Scientology with its focus on celebrities. Maybe Tom DeLonge
Maybe. DeLong was back in Blink 182 touring and recording in the BAASS time frame:

External Quote:

Following internal tension spearheaded by DeLonge, the band broke up in 2005[1] before reuniting in 2009. During their initial breakup, DeLonge formed Angels & Airwaves, which has released five albums and evolved into what he calls an "art project" encompassing various forms of media. In 2015, DeLonge once again departed from Blink-182 before returning a second time in 2022.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_DeLonge

But he did form To The Stars in 2015 which became TTSA with Puthoff, Semivan, Elizondo, Mellon, Davis and others involved (bold by me):

External Quote:

In 2015, DeLonge founded an entertainment company called To the Stars, Inc. which, in 2017, he merged into a larger To the Stars Academy of Arts & Sciences. Aside from the entertainment division, the new company has aerospace and science divisions dedicated to ufology and the fringe science proposals of To the Star's co-founder, Harold Puthoff.[126] The evolution of the company was motivated by the contacts DeLonge has had with the Air Force establishment and high ranked people in aerospace companies collaborating with the Pentagon
So, it sounds like he knew some of these people. He had a reputation for believing in UFOs, cryptids and various conspiracy theories.

BAASS never really lasted long enough to get the PR machine up and rolling. If anything, by 2010 BAASS may have wanted to keep a lower profile while Lacatski and Reid worked on SAP status.

I'm sure some of the "radio personalities" included George Noori and the "well know TV journalist" was likely George Knapp. He may not be that well known outside of the UFO world, but one thing this group does all the time is puff up each others CVs.

This'll be some fun reading.
 
I am suspicious of this new leaked document actually being created in 2009. This report uses "UAP" throughout, but that did not appear to be in use in other BAASS related documents from that time.

In the Nimitz "Executive Summary" document from 2009, previously released by Knapp, the term used throughout is "Anomalous Aerial Vehicles (AAV)" and UAP is not used at all.
1748823227926.png

External Quote:
This Executive Summary of the 2004 USS Nimitz "Tic Tac" event was obtained by investigative journalist George Knapp, from KLAS-TV Las Vegas. According to Knapp, the 2009 report was created for the U.S. military and includes statements from seven Navy pilots as well as radar operators. The summary notes the advanced sensors used to detect the Tic-Tac shaped craft, the exact location of Commander David Fravor's intercept and the Tic Tac's extraordinary capabilities. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE REDACTED 13-PAGE REPORT.
Source: https://loki.editorial.aetnd.com/ne...evealing-documents-from-historys-unidentified
Direct PDF link: https://cropper.watch.aetnd.com/cdn...REPORT_1526682843046_42960218_ver1.0-copy.pdf

Similarly, in the 2011 KONA BLUE documents presented to DHS, and previously declassified at the request of AARO, they use "Advanced Aerospace Vehicle (AAV)" throughout, and UAP is not used at all.
1748823325047.png

Direct PDF link: https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/UAP_Records_Research/AARO_DHS_Kona_Blue.pdf
Searchable PDF from John Greenwald at Blackvault: https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/osd/konablue-release1.pdf

UAP seems like an anachronism that would not be present in an authentic 2009 BAASS report, and the expected AAV, used in other documents from the time, is not used at all in this new leaked document. That seems pretty fishy.

Edit: Apparently the alleged full Nimitz report from 2010 was leaked by the same account on X (see this thread: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-baass-nimitz-tic-tac-analysis.14240/). They include portions of the "Executive Summary" but appear to be aware of the discrepency between AAV and UAP, but this to me feels like an attempt to retcon the previously leaked material to fit this new (allegedly old) material. I don't know of any other documents from 2009-2011, besides these new alleged leaks, where "the more common Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP)" was used.
1748824599718.png

Source: https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/tic_tac_full_report-pdf.80859/
 
Last edited:
I don't know of any other documents from 2009-2011, besides these new alleged leaks, where "the more common Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP)" was used.

The plot thickens! I'm not disagreeing with you, but what would the point be? Why concoct a fake report? I've just started reading it and it's 500+ pages.
 
The plot thickens! I'm not disagreeing with you, but what would the point be? Why concoct a fake report? I've just started reading it and it's 500+ pages.
I'm not really sure. My current thinking is they may contain actual information from BAASS documents that have previously not been released/leaked, but perhaps compiled later and retroactively dated to 2010 with BAASS branding, possibly as part of some effort like this one described by Elizondo.

External Quote:
Jay [Stratton] spent weeks creating an operation plan (OPLAN), code-named "Interloper." It was a classic "honey pot." We would orchestrate a situation that was so irresistible and almost impossible for the enemy to ignore. With each new iteration of the OPLAN, Jay inserted more data in the proposal to bolster our argument. Dates, times, locations, call signs, and the ship names of all vessels that had UAP encounters. Jay also included radar data that substantiated the eyewitness testimonies of flustered pilots and aircrew. The Interloper document painted a very persuasive picture to whoever read it.
Source: Luis Elizondo, Imminent: Inside the Pentagon's Hunt for UFOs, 2024, p. 165.

This is of course just speculation based on the apparently anachronistic use of UAP, so I am hoping either other examples of BAASS related documents using UAP from 2009-2011 are found, or more details about the provenance and provenience of these new documents is found that verifies they actually are from 2010.
 
I am suspicious of this new leaked document actually being created in 2009. This report uses "UAP" throughout, but that did not appear to be in use in other BAASS related documents from that time.
The SCU paper published in 2019 about the 2004 Nimitz incident, according to Ctrl+F (and confirming those), uses "AAV" 68 times in the document and does not appear to use "UAP" at all except once in a short passage about SCU itself, which contains "UAP" in the name. The SCU paper also includes quotes from a colleague of Fravor, who wrote about it in 2015, and that person used "AAV", not "UAP". The included FOIA from 2017 on page 41 also includes the phrase "Anomalous Aerial Vehicles, Unidentified Airborne Contacts, or other terminology used to describe unknown aircraft". So "AAV" again and "UAC" but no "UAP".
https://www.explorescu.org/post/2004-uss-nimitz-strike-navy-group-incident-report

Also unrelated but just noticed in that document's table of contents SCU writes that "FLIR" stands for "Forward Looking Infrared Radar", which isn't right.
Screenshot 2025-06-01 at 11.58.15 PM.png
 
Both leaked reports have descriptions of the Nimitz encounter, and one has FLIR screenshots of abominable quality:
SmartSelect_20250602-055016_Samsung Notes.jpg

Is it ok for these to not have a classification?
 
Should note that Tim McMillan (now at The Debrief) first reported on this "BAASS 10-month report" back in 2020, where he showed a few images and cherry-picked select descriptions from it.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mi.../government-secret-ufo-program-investigation/

I always wondered how McMillan was able to get ahold of this mythical report. He later told me he was family friends with Jay Stratton, dating back pre-2017.

Everything makes sense now. McMillan's wife, who worked for the Department of Defense, was reportedly offered a job in Germany. Since Lt. Tim was already family friends with Jay Stratton, this created a great opportunity for him to start working as an investigative journalist. He used the move to build a content distribution network based overseas, which mainly relies on DoD insider sources to report on UAPs.

And there was me thinking the Debrief was just a cutout.
 
I am suspicious of this new leaked document actually being created in 2009. This report uses "UAP" throughout, but that did not appear to be in use in other BAASS related documents from that time.

In the Nimitz "Executive Summary" document from 2009, previously released by Knapp, the term used throughout is "Anomalous Aerial Vehicles (AAV)" and UAP is not used at all.
View attachment 80881
External Quote:
This Executive Summary of the 2004 USS Nimitz "Tic Tac" event was obtained by investigative journalist George Knapp, from KLAS-TV Las Vegas. According to Knapp, the 2009 report was created for the U.S. military and includes statements from seven Navy pilots as well as radar operators. The summary notes the advanced sensors used to detect the Tic-Tac shaped craft, the exact location of Commander David Fravor's intercept and the Tic Tac's extraordinary capabilities. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE REDACTED 13-PAGE REPORT.
Source: https://loki.editorial.aetnd.com/ne...evealing-documents-from-historys-unidentified
Direct PDF link: https://cropper.watch.aetnd.com/cdn...REPORT_1526682843046_42960218_ver1.0-copy.pdf

Similarly, in the 2011 KONA BLUE documents presented to DHS, and previously declassified at the request of AARO, they use "Advanced Aerospace Vehicle (AAV)" throughout, and UAP is not used at all.
View attachment 80883
Direct PDF link: https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/UAP_Records_Research/AARO_DHS_Kona_Blue.pdf
Searchable PDF from John Greenwald at Blackvault: https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/osd/konablue-release1.pdf

UAP seems like an anachronism that would not be present in an authentic 2009 BAASS report, and the expected AAV, used in other documents from the time, is not used at all in this new leaked document. That seems pretty fishy.

Edit: Apparently the alleged full Nimitz report from 2010 was leaked by the same account on X (see this thread: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-baass-nimitz-tic-tac-analysis.14240/). They include portions of the "Executive Summary" but appear to be aware of the discrepency between AAV and UAP, but this to me feels like an attempt to retcon the previously leaked material to fit this new (allegedly old) material. I don't know of any other documents from 2009-2011, besides these new alleged leaks, where "the more common Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP)" was used.
View attachment 80885
Source: https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/tic_tac_full_report-pdf.80859/
It's odder when you consider that the "Aerial" in UAP has since become "Anomalous" added during the period when it meant "Aerial" or someone in BAASS personally preferred the term and later made it reality..
 
So, does that mean the PDF was created in June '15? If so, a PDF can be created from an existing file right? Once can create a report in Word or Pages and at some point save it as a PDF. Could just mean whatever report that already existed was converted to a PDF in 2015.
Guess we can say the earliest version we have is 2015, but that could have just been when the docs were scanned. Doesn't help us I guess to figure out when the original docs were made.
 
It seems a rather long document to outright hoax.

However, I found this section strange. If this is some sort of 10 month report from BAASS to DIA and Lacatski, the wording here is, IDK unprofessional? It's talking about how they, specifically Bigelow, ended up using, and likely leasing, some of his own properties to house BAASS in. The "lease to yourself" is a common tax trick for various professionals and companies. Doctors may set up a Real Estate holding company and a separate medical practice company that then leases space from the real estate company. Funds, in the form of "rent" can be shuffled for tax advantages. Whether Bigelow was doing this, or it just made sense to use his own properties, I wouldn't think a formal report would use a quote like this to justify the choice:

External Quote:

Robert Bigelow, the BAASS administrator summarized the initial problems associated with correctly choosing the first BAASS facility in the October 2008monthly report:


"I personally spent considerable time checking out numerous possible locations for BAASS, keeping in mind that, certain criteria needed to be met. In addition to this criteria, there were issues of physical modifications that were necessary for all locations. Issues including: who would pay for these changes; the reluctance of landlords to agree (sometimes we could not locate a spokesperson responsible for the landlord) to these modifications; and the glacial pace that this entire remodeling process would take. All choices required some remodeling and the landlords were not very accommodating. Finally, I chose one of my own buildings. BAASS would not have a landlord standing over it, dictating every remodeling move or preventing some important change. Also, very (page break)

important, was eliminating the possibility of any landlord (surprise) inspections, as well as, having absolute control over who else might the landlord rent to in any adjoining offices with a preference for none."
It just sounds odd. One would think a formal, or formalish, report would use more professional language. Something like:

"The current Las Vegas real estate market for commercial units fitting the specific needs of BAASS made it difficult to procure, negotiate a lease and obtain proper Tenet Improvements (TI) for an appropriate facility. BAASS chose to use one of Bigelow's existing buildings to streamline the effort and maintain security protocols."

Right? Is it just me, or is this a weird way to describe how they decided to use a Bigelow building. Something I assume everyone knew was going to happen anyway. Why would he lease someone else's property when he has his own, assuming it fit his needs?

Just complete speculation here, but IF BAASS was run by Bigelow using tax dollars and he was in turn renting from himself with those dollars, some explanation might be needed to justify the situation. It's almost as if Bigelow told someone the above quote as an explanation and frame work for how to spin this in the report. As if he told someone to write up something more professional sounding based on what he said, and they just went with the quote.
 
Still reading through this report, time permitting, and I gotta say I'm still finding the tone and language strange.

In the section on equipment, there's extensive discussion on what type of camera or computer to use and how a Fujitsu "Lifebook" was a better value than the traditional Toughbook. And even then, they misidentify the Toughbook as a Sony product, while they have always been produced by Panasonic:

External Quote:

Along with our research into cameras, the same effort went into choosing our laptop computers, GPS unit and other electronics. We currently have 2 Fujitsu T1010 "Lifebook" laptop computers for field use. These are highly durable units which are capable of being used in the field as well as an office. While our first choice of a laptop was a Sony Toughbook, we found that the Fujitsu is highly rated for durability, ease of use, and priced substantially lower than the Sony. We have had no problems with these units, and are confident in our choice.
pg: 18

Note, they had "2" computers for field use, which sorta corresponds to the Org chart in the OP, as it appears BAASS had 2 teams under the Investigation Manager, Johnson:

1749052314228.png


After talking about how they chose various bits of kit, they include a review of the equipment. Like from Consumer Reports or a product review site:

External Quote:

After using out current equipment on the initial deployment to Oregon, we found that most of our equipment served well in the field. Below, are some suggestions as to how certain new equipment or upgrades in current equipment would benefit BAASS investigators.
pg: 21

This is followed by a review, including a discussion of price for some items like range finders:

External Quote:

Laser Range Finder: This is a necessary piece of equipment not yet in our inventory. We encountered very steep and rain soaked inclines, making it impossible to get accurate distance measurements. Range finders in the long range (1200+yards/meters) start at $400.00 and go up to $2800.00 for a military grade unit capable of distanced of 2600 yards/meters.
pg: 22

Again, I'm confused about who this is for. I haven't worked in government so I don't have any knowledge of how progress reports might be written, but would a company charged with a multi-million dollar contract to provide information on UFOs, or anything else, give their Government contract overlords product reviews and discussions of value?

One would think they would either provide the information on UFOs, with things like camera make and model included as needed, or a brief discussion about gearing up for future work. The report seems full of overly verbose and long winded discussions of internal minutia. Does any contract administrator care that a "Lifebook" was chosen over a "Toughbook" for value?

Moving on this paragraph was interesting, as it really sums up what they thought BAASS was going to be doing. As opposed to just fulfilling the original contract to AWWSAP by providing speculative technology papers, BAASS anticipated actually getting recovered UFO pieces to reverse engineer:

External Quote:

The BAASS mission being to identify and exploit technology discovered through the investigation of Unexplained Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) is directly impacted by the intelligence threat. Many of the technological areas illustrated in the above table have direct applicability to BAASS. These technological areas are heavily targeted by both State sponsored intelligence agencies as well as private enterprise.
pg: 48

Earlier in the report, it describes how BAASS planed to build a "vault" for the sample they expected to acquire:

External Quote:

The need for a highly secure underground vault operated by BAASS became apparent in line with a BAASS priority to pursue and acquire recovered hardware and biological samples from the corporate world and/or from private individuals and groups located elsewhere, including Brazil.

Further, the BAASS administrator during the month of May designed and created architectural plans for a 5000 sq.ft underground vault with 3 foot thick walls, ceiling and floor with a concrete access tunnel leading to multiple security doors, at least one ofwhich comprises a thick vault steel door. The entire facility will be located underground at the Bigelow Aerospace facility with over 15-20 feet of earth above the structure. Any surface structures protruding from the ground will be extensively camouflaged.
pg: 3

Recall that a statement was entered into the congressional hearings by Rep Burchett, making the claim that BAASS had a Technology Transfer Agreement (TTA) with Lockheed-Martin for supposed UFO samples. According to the source, the CIA stoped the TTA from moving forward. Link below to thread on this claim.

This report confirms at least the notion that someone at BAASS thought they were going to get UFO parts from somewhere, possibly including Bigelow himself. This quote is supposedly Vallee recalling a 2009 conversation where Bigelow complained he wasn't getting the UFO parts from Lockheed he had been promised:

External Quote:

2 October 2008 — Bob Bigelow tells Jacques Vallee that the AAWSAP project has officially kicked off, but the sponsor (DIA) hasn't delivered any access that was promised. Opening certain doors, intros to potentially key personnel at contractors that may have worked on UAP in the past, etc. None of that happened as of that time.
Above quote from Vallee's Forbidding Science, Pacific Heights Vol. 5 2000-2009 and pulled from Shellenberger's UAP Timeline: https://pdfhost.io/v/gR8lAdgVd_Uap_Timeline_Prepared_By_Another

If anything, the idea that a brand new company, BAASS, with a contract to provide speculative tech papers was better equipped to reverse engineer UFO parts than the leading military/aerospace contractor, Lockheed, is farcical.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/cl...er-of-meta-materials-from-crashed-ufos.13773/
 
Again, I'm confused about who this is for. I haven't worked in government so I don't have any knowledge of how progress reports might be written, but would a company charged with a multi-million dollar contract to provide information on UFOs, or anything else, give their Government contract overlords product reviews and discussions of value?

Government is interested in equipment doing actual data capture, cameras and range finders could be included, as might ruggedized equipment for use in the field if working in the field was one of the requirements, but equipment under the heading of "standard office automation equipment" would not be. Mostly the contracting officer is concerned that you actually have or have costed the equipment, not what brand you are buying. Product reviews only if the product is one your company is proposing to build as part of the contract and its better than what is already available.

Recall that a statement was entered into the congressional hearings by Rep Burchett, making the claim that BAASS had a Technology Transfer Agreement (TTA) with Lockheed-Martin for supposed UFO samples. According to the source, the CIA stoped the TTA from moving forward. Link below to thread on this claim.

This report confirms at least the notion that someone at BAASS thought they were going to get UFO parts from somewhere, possibly including Bigelow himself. This quote is supposedly Vallee recalling a 2009 conversation where Bigelow complained he wasn't getting the UFO parts from Lockheed he had been promised:

The fundamental driving force behind so much of the current "Disclosure" is that some people are absolutely convinced that the government and some contractors have UFO's or pieces of UFO's. And they just can't let go of that idea.

When they say the CIA stopped the TTA from moving forward they never, ever think that maybe the CIA just don't have anything to pass along.
And the poor people at CIA are left shaking their heads saying "These guys again..."

If anything, the idea that a brand new company, BAASS, with a contract to provide speculative tech papers was better equipped to reverse engineer UFO parts than the leading military/aerospace contractor, Lockheed, is farcical.

Track records do matter when it comes to government contracting, Past Performance is one of the factors when deciding who to award a contract too. And it can be big part of the decision if there is an incumbent who successfully executed the previous edition of the contract.
 
Track records do matter when it comes to government contracting, Past Performance is one of the factors when deciding who to award a contract too. And it can be big part of the decision if there is an incumbent who successfully executed the previous edition of the contract.
So if you haven't reverse engineered a flying saucer before, you're not going to get the job? ;)

I'm getting the impression that TTSA's CRADA stunt with the "metamaterial" was so that Elizondo could find out which companies would get the job of analysing it—but nah, that'd be a conspiracy theory... ;)
 
Government is interested in equipment doing actual data capture, cameras and range finders could be included, as might ruggedized equipment for use in the field if working in the field was one of the requirements, but equipment under the heading of "standard office automation equipment" would not be. Mostly the contracting officer is concerned that you actually have or have costed the equipment, not what brand you are buying. Product reviews only if the product is one your company is proposing to build as part of the contract and its better than what is already available.

Yeah maybe. In this case we have already have a discrepancy in that the RFP BAASS was created to contract too had nothing to do with "data capture", at least not according to the RFP. Even then, wouldn't the contractor just list the equipment they are using? IDK, the language just seems off.

When they say the CIA stopped the TTA from moving forward they never, ever think that maybe the CIA just don't have anything to pass along.
And the poor people at CIA are left shaking their heads saying "These guys again..."

The claim isn't that the CIA had UFO parts, but that they blocked the transfer of said parts from Lockheed to BAASS. Again, why would Lockheed want to give up UFO parts to a competitor? IF the government is forcing them, why to a brand new upstart with a few physicists with little to no track record in defense and aero-space, besides some speculative papers on teleportation?

The fundamental driving force behind so much of the current "Disclosure" is that some people are absolutely convinced that the government and some contractors have UFO's or pieces of UFO's. And they just can't let go of that idea.

I think that's the real crux of the matter. And in some of these situations, like BAASS, the "absolutely convinced" people were connected with the government and wealthy believers. I may have to pony up the $10 for a Kindel version of Vallee's memoirs, as it seems a lot of BAASS and AWWSAP is foreshadowed in his books as is the constant beliefs about the government recovery program from the people involved in BAASS.
 
It's unclear who is responsible for this report: who wrote/compiled it?
It's unclear whom it was written for: who is intended audience? who commissioned it?
It mentions the Utah ranch ("Project Engagement"). When it comes to witness reports from the ranch, it does not mention names, though the witnesses are BAASS employees.
This absence of names throughout feels icky. The report's author achieves this through use of passive voice, and refers to roles rather than names.
I would expect a report to name names; and where that is not possible, use code names instead that are consistent throughout the report.

BAASS has 47 employees, according to the report. Why does it need to rent an additional 5 office buildings? What does it mean that these rentals are "in escrow"?

They have 2 laptops. How many response boxes do they have? Where are the laptops stored, the report is unclear?
The equipment lists on page 21 and page 512 are different.

This whole report feels amateurish, as if written by an 8th grader playing at cloak&dagger. If it is real, and the CIA saw it, it 100% explains why they would put a stop to any type of co-operation.
It feels like it avoids areas that the author feels insecure about (most names and people) and delves into minutiae that the author feels more secure about.

I would have expected an overall report to portray the units BAASS is comprised of, and their contributions to company activities. This report leaves me wondering what the people in the report are doing, and whether they exist at all.

Who cleans their top secret facility?
 
Last edited:
Compare:

2025-06-01_10-53-55.jpg


2025-06-01_11-22-35.jpg


These charts are dated 7 days apart.

Two names are put differently:
• Doug Kurth vs. Douglas Kurth
• Bob King vs. Robert King

The executive assistant differs:
• Tess Lee vs. Donna Stauch

The head of IT, Roger Gonzales, does not appear on the org chart.
Neither do the consultants.

But there's an employee list on page 5/6, too:
SmartSelect_20250605-084529_Samsung Notes.jpg
SmartSelect_20250605-084717_Samsung Notes.jpg
SmartSelect_20250605-084639_Samsung Notes.jpg


• Tess Lee's job title is different: "Executive Secretary" vs. "Executive Asst." on the org chart.
• Donna Stauch is listed as Bigelow's assistant, with part-time status
• Roger Gonzales is "Director of IT" on the clearance list, but part-time "Subject Matter Expert IV" on the employee list.

The job titles on the org chart and the employee list don't match in many places.

The cherry on top is page 2:
SmartSelect_20250605-091312_Samsung Notes.jpg

The list above does have 47 entries, but the 47th is "Utah Ranch—Security Officers".

I wonder who was doing accounting and human resources. All they have is a part-time accountant. Maybe that's why they only know "approximately" how many employees they have?
 
Last edited:
The fundamental driving force behind so much of the current "Disclosure" is that some people are absolutely convinced that the government and some contractors have UFO's or pieces of UFO's. And they just can't let go of that idea.
That, and enough time has passed since the last time we got disclosure (in which, like previous times, it was disclosed that the government does not have any UFOs, does not know of any evidence of ET cruising around, and that cases where there is enough evidence are generally solved as mundane), a new crop pf UFOlogist have risen through the ranks of Big UFO, casual followers of UFO lore have forgotten previous "disclosure moments," and so it is just time to go through this exercise again.

It will be interesting to watch it happen in a more aggressively credulous age, with the Internet in the mix...
 
I am suspicious of this new leaked document actually being created in 2009. This report uses "UAP" throughout, but that did not appear to be in use in other BAASS related documents from that time.

In the Nimitz "Executive Summary" document from 2009, previously released by Knapp, the term used throughout is "Anomalous Aerial Vehicles (AAV)" and UAP is not used at all.
View attachment 80881
External Quote:
This Executive Summary of the 2004 USS Nimitz "Tic Tac" event was obtained by investigative journalist George Knapp, from KLAS-TV Las Vegas. According to Knapp, the 2009 report was created for the U.S. military and includes statements from seven Navy pilots as well as radar operators. The summary notes the advanced sensors used to detect the Tic-Tac shaped craft, the exact location of Commander David Fravor's intercept and the Tic Tac's extraordinary capabilities. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE REDACTED 13-PAGE REPORT.
Source: https://loki.editorial.aetnd.com/ne...evealing-documents-from-historys-unidentified
Direct PDF link: https://cropper.watch.aetnd.com/cdn...REPORT_1526682843046_42960218_ver1.0-copy.pdf

Similarly, in the 2011 KONA BLUE documents presented to DHS, and previously declassified at the request of AARO, they use "Advanced Aerospace Vehicle (AAV)" throughout, and UAP is not used at all.
View attachment 80883
Direct PDF link: https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/UAP_Records_Research/AARO_DHS_Kona_Blue.pdf
Searchable PDF from John Greenwald at Blackvault: https://documents2.theblackvault.com/documents/osd/konablue-release1.pdf

UAP seems like an anachronism that would not be present in an authentic 2009 BAASS report, and the expected AAV, used in other documents from the time, is not used at all in this new leaked document. That seems pretty fishy.

Edit: Apparently the alleged full Nimitz report from 2010 was leaked by the same account on X (see this thread: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-baass-nimitz-tic-tac-analysis.14240/). They include portions of the "Executive Summary" but appear to be aware of the discrepency between AAV and UAP, but this to me feels like an attempt to retcon the previously leaked material to fit this new (allegedly old) material. I don't know of any other documents from 2009-2011, besides these new alleged leaks, where "the more common Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP)" was used.
View attachment 80885
Source: https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/tic_tac_full_report-pdf.80859/
Yes, that did seem odd to me. UAP didn't really take off until much later. But Google ngram shows it was emerging around 2010:

IMG_0267.jpeg
 
If BAASS leadership genuinely expected things like sample transfers, Lockheed hand-offs, and even built plans for a secure vault, how did they come to believe that? These weren't random outsiders; they were working directly with DIA sponsors like Lacatski. Why would government customers let them think access to materials was imminent if it were all baseless?

If this were just a hoax, you'd have to assume not only that someone faked 500+ pages of detail, but also that BAASS, Bigelow, and Vallee all independently fabricated or misremembered the same expectations. Isn't the simpler explanation that BAASS was led to believe access would come, and it just never materialized?
 
Isn't the simpler explanation that BAASS was led to believe access would come, and it just never materialized?

I would argue it's more likely the BAASS people BELIEVED access would come. Nobody led them to believe this besides themselves.

Just my take, but don't underestimate Hal Puthoff's involvement here. He was a big part of Bigelow's previous endeavor at Skinwalker Ranch, NIDS and by some accounts was influential in both Bigelow's and later Fugal's purchase of the ranch. His company, EarthTech, was contracted by BAASS to produce the 36 DIRD papers, the only official product of the AAWSAP contract with BAASS. Puthoff accompanied Lacatski to the meeting with DHS that resulted in the failed AAWSAP follow up, KONA BLUE (see link below). He played a big part in BAASS. In addition his sidekick Eric Davis was also involved in BAASS.

Puthoff often characterized himself as "Ex-CIA". To my knowledge, he was never in the CIA or part of the CIA. He and Russel Targ did contract to the US Army and later the CIA through the Stanford Research Institute in the '70s with their failed remote viewing experiments and were fooled by spoon-bending huckster Uri Geller.

According to Vallee, Puthoff, along with Davis and Ex CIA Dr, Kit Green, was constantly on about crashed UFOs in the possession of defense contractors going back to the '90s or earlier. Puthoff himself has repeated these claims in recent podcasts, including Joe Rogan. As does Davis, while at the same time admitting he never had the needed clearance for access to the supposed crashed UFOs.

Puthoff convinced the BAASS people that various defense contractors had UFOs and that if AAWSAP or KONA BLUE worked out right, BAASS would gets some material from these contractors. He is the main source of this belief within BAASS.

Big discussion of this claim here:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/cl...er-of-meta-materials-from-crashed-ufos.13773/

Puthoff's sidekick Davis making the claim again to some Congress people and claiming to be a source to David Grusch. Warning, Davis is extremely long winded and rambles a lot:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ua...ith-house-oversight-committee-may-2025.14218/
 
If BAASS leadership genuinely expected things like sample transfers, Lockheed hand-offs, and even built plans for a secure vault, how did they come to believe that? These weren't random outsiders; they were working directly with DIA sponsors like Lacatski. Why would government customers let them think access to materials was imminent if it were all baseless?

If this were just a hoax, you'd have to assume not only that someone faked 500+ pages of detail, but also that BAASS, Bigelow, and Vallee all independently fabricated or misremembered the same expectations. Isn't the simpler explanation that BAASS was led to believe access would come, and it just never materialized?
The summary of Dave's excellent post is that you're half right, and someone led them to believe that. There's no evidence it was someone "from the government", and it's likely that it was Hal Puthoff.

You have to remember that people are easily conned when you play into their beliefs.
 
I would argue it's more likely the BAASS people BELIEVED access would come. Nobody led them to believe this besides themselves.

Just my take, but don't underestimate Hal Puthoff's involvement here. He was a big part of Bigelow's previous endeavor at Skinwalker Ranch, NIDS and by some accounts was influential in both Bigelow's and later Fugal's purchase of the ranch. His company, EarthTech, was contracted by BAASS to produce the 36 DIRD papers, the only official product of the AAWSAP contract with BAASS. Puthoff accompanied Lacatski to the meeting with DHS that resulted in the failed AAWSAP follow up, KONA BLUE (see link below). He played a big part in BAASS. In addition his sidekick Eric Davis was also involved in BAASS.

Puthoff often characterized himself as "Ex-CIA". To my knowledge, he was never in the CIA or part of the CIA. He and Russel Targ did contract to the US Army and later the CIA through the Stanford Research Institute in the '70s with their failed remote viewing experiments and were fooled by spoon-bending huckster Uri Geller.

According to Vallee, Puthoff, along with Davis and Ex CIA Dr, Kit Green, was constantly on about crashed UFOs in the possession of defense contractors going back to the '90s or earlier. Puthoff himself has repeated these claims in recent podcasts, including Joe Rogan. As does Davis, while at the same time admitting he never had the needed clearance for access to the supposed crashed UFOs.

Puthoff convinced the BAASS people that various defense contractors had UFOs and that if AAWSAP or KONA BLUE worked out right, BAASS would gets some material from these contractors. He is the main source of this belief within BAASS.

Big discussion of this claim here:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/cl...er-of-meta-materials-from-crashed-ufos.13773/

Puthoff's sidekick Davis making the claim again to some Congress people and claiming to be a source to David Grusch. Warning, Davis is extremely long winded and rambles a lot:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ua...ith-house-oversight-committee-may-2025.14218/
On the first point, I would also add that, if the BAASS leaks are accurate, we know why they had this presumption! They were running a campaign to influence government executives into giving them access into what they believed existed. I mentioned it before but, while technically an influence campaign from that angle, it was also seeking to conduct espionage. The plan outright states they A) had NTK material they did not have access too, B) had active sources that gave them this information, and C) were attempting to influence executives into giving them official access to this NTK material to expand their access too it.
Then just sprinkle in, for any respective individual, they already think/lie about it containing something that is misperceived or doesn't exist.

Correct also, Puthoff was never an actual CIA employee, nor an independent contractor (nor a contractor acting independently through a contracting company). He was a participant through SRI.

This also gets into the "core" bit I mention with the larger social network. A lot of these guys who haven't passed away are still around. Hal Puthoff, Kit Green, Vallee etc are part of the core group. This is the 'first generation' in the broader social network and primarily comprises scientists and government/military executives (eg Stubblebine). Coincidentally, nearly all of these people, including those deceased and the rare outliers, are near wholly participants in esoteric or new age religions. Puthoff, Targ, and quite a few others were Scientologists. Vallee is a Rosicrucian as were quite a lot of the other scientists. These peoples specific theories, notating they are framed scientifically, we all kind of know them, have roots in a lot of the theories and narratives out and about today.

The second gen started to involve more professionals in other career fields. Think people like Ed Dames and Rick Doty. These individuals largely altered the original theories from the first crew into the more woo stuff. Eg Ed Dames and his features on Coast to Coast (also the facilitator for a lot of the whackier remote viewing cases like the alien bases lol). Or Doty and his pet disinformation projects have perhaps IMO had the highest gravity impact on most current theories. Just as an isolated example, his Project SERPO was responsible for pretty much grandsizing the theories about the US govt interacting with the aliens (which he was also largely behind that alone too), Dulce, etc.
In nearly every case, these people were recruited or mentored by, or otherwise worked in some professional regard with the first gen.

The 'third gen' comes about, as far as I can tag, around the late 90s-early 2000s. This would include people like Elizondo and co who directly interacted with say BAASS, and that was their "introduction" into the broader social network at play here. Much like the second gen, this also near entirely includes professionals in non-scientific fields, but rather fields such as counterintelligence, counterterrorism/COIN, etc. Much like the second gen, these people at some point either were recruited or mentored by, or otherwise professionally worked with people in the first gen, generally 'the core' of the first gen. Outside mil/gov types, this gen also saw a wider capture (note: concerted effort to do so eg BAASS leaks) of people in the entertainment industry, journalism, tech companies, academics, etc into the social network. This does NOT mean they didn't exist before, just not enough in quantity within the social network to be a defined group.
I use "capture" here, and in the next paragraph, to reference defined concerted efforts to introduce these folks rather than it being incidental.

The fourth, and what we are currently in, started around the 2010s. This genhas actually mostly been brought into the social network through third gen participants although have still generally worked professionally, or alternatively have personal relations with members of the core group of the first gen. This, like the third gen, includes a healthy mix of different types of participants. We see the mil/gov types, although this has changed more towards executives (think Mellon), Nell did a lot relating to COIN so kinda falls in the above but he was an executive also - otherwise it's more guys like Grusch who did things like Space Ops rather than CI types, etc.
In this gen, we have also seen widescale capture of politicians and corporate executives. "Capture" aligned to the above reference to identify this has been a self-admitted concerted effort from these participants. We know of at least two "projects" they conducted attempting to do this (ref BAASS leaks) that directly included administrative participation of the core group of the first gen.
In re the overall social network, this has also caused a lot of fracturing we somewhat see elements of. For example, Thiel is a powerful actor in this social network now, but he is not part of "the core" of the first gen. His interests, and those who are in his part of the network directly compete with the others. His seems to entirely comprise fourth generation folks, I'm not aware if they were introduced/captured or just injected themselves in (it would be grandly funny if they just injected themselves), not confident enough for an assessment based conclusion on that yet either.

Now, this, we have less direct sourcing on. Although going back to 'the core' at the time of the first generation/era. We do have plenty of references in books and articles to their expressed efforts to spread these theories. I'll have to re-find the quote to present, but as an example, there was a time Kit Green and one of the others supposedly gave either one or a series of speeches at the CIA cafeteria w/r/t UAP subjects, with the intent to spread the theories. At one of these they apparently made the joke that they were turning out CIA folks to spy on the CIA itself for UFOs, which seemingly would appear to be accurate based upon an abundance of other aligned references to their behavior and personal statements.
Then consider with the esoteric types specifically this absolutely spread around the government in wider ways than actually known. I mention it sometimes, usually as a case of how the output isn't always whacky when the govt toys with it. One of the gentlemen that also worked with Uri Geller - in fact, the very gentleman that brought him over here and introduced him to Puthoff and all that, was Andrija Puharich. Andrija (also a member of the first gen, just not part of the UFO types nor part of the core) would later go on to do some of the foundational research on the potential to leverage ELF for biophysical effect. This would later go on to develop the entire field of Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations/other buzzwords referencing it, alongside being a critical root to some of the research that'd relate to other things such as acoustic weaponry.
 
Last edited:
I would argue it's more likely the BAASS people BELIEVED access would come. Nobody led them to believe this besides themselves.

Just my take, but don't underestimate Hal Puthoff's involvement here. He was a big part of Bigelow's previous endeavor at Skinwalker Ranch, NIDS and by some accounts was influential in both Bigelow's and later Fugal's purchase of the ranch. His company, EarthTech, was contracted by BAASS to produce the 36 DIRD papers, the only official product of the AAWSAP contract with BAASS. Puthoff accompanied Lacatski to the meeting with DHS that resulted in the failed AAWSAP follow up, KONA BLUE (see link below). He played a big part in BAASS. In addition his sidekick Eric Davis was also involved in BAASS.

Puthoff often characterized himself as "Ex-CIA". To my knowledge, he was never in the CIA or part of the CIA. He and Russel Targ did contract to the US Army and later the CIA through the Stanford Research Institute in the '70s with their failed remote viewing experiments and were fooled by spoon-bending huckster Uri Geller.

According to Vallee, Puthoff, along with Davis and Ex CIA Dr, Kit Green, was constantly on about crashed UFOs in the possession of defense contractors going back to the '90s or earlier. Puthoff himself has repeated these claims in recent podcasts, including Joe Rogan. As does Davis, while at the same time admitting he never had the needed clearance for access to the supposed crashed UFOs.

Puthoff convinced the BAASS people that various defense contractors had UFOs and that if AAWSAP or KONA BLUE worked out right, BAASS would gets some material from these contractors. He is the main source of this belief within BAASS.

Big discussion of this claim here:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/cl...er-of-meta-materials-from-crashed-ufos.13773/

Puthoff's sidekick Davis making the claim again to some Congress people and claiming to be a source to David Grusch. Warning, Davis is extremely long winded and rambles a lot:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ua...ith-house-oversight-committee-may-2025.14218/
It's one thing to say Puthoff seeded these ideas, but quite another to explain why BAASS produced structured plans, why Vallee corroborates the same expectations, and why DIA officials never disabused them. That doesn't sound like self-belief. Sounds like an expectation shaped by signals from the very government customers funding them. The simpler explanation isn't mass self-delusion, but that they were led to believe access might come, and it just didn't.
 
The summary of Dave's excellent post is that you're half right, and someone led them to believe that. There's no evidence it was someone "from the government", and it's likely that it was Hal Puthoff.

You have to remember that people are easily conned when you play into their beliefs.
To suggest they all hallucinated the same operational-level details because one colleague was persuasive is spurious, because it requires assuming that BAASS, Bigelow, and Vallee all independently fabricated or misremembered the same expectations, while their DIA sponsors somehow never corrected them. That's a much higher bar than the simpler explanation: they were led to believe access would come, and it just didn't. And if the goal is to debunk, you can't replace one unproven story (crash retrievals) with another unproven story ("Puthoff just made it up") ... that's exactly how bunk gets made in the first place.
 
To suggest they all hallucinated the same operational-level details because one colleague was persuasive is spurious, because it requires assuming that BAASS, Bigelow, and Vallee all independently fabricated or misremembered the same expectations, while their DIA sponsors somehow never corrected them. That's a much higher bar than the simpler explanation: they were led to believe access would come, and it just didn't. And if the goal is to debunk, you can't replace one unproven story (crash retrievals) with another unproven story ("Puthoff just made it up") ... that's exactly how bunk gets made in the first place.
"because it requires assuming that BAASS, Bigelow, and Vallee all independently fabricated or misremembered the same expectations," — it simply requires they all believed Puthoff (or whoever else proposed this)

"while their DIA sponsors somehow never corrected them" — that's an unconfirmed supposition on your part. Remember, BAASS was never fully overt about their operations, and would simply have assumed that anyone who corrected them was lying, or "not in on it".

We also still do not know that these alleged BAASS documents are genuine, and not fakes.

"And if the goal is to debunk, you can't replace one unproven story (crash retrievals) with another unproven story ("Puthoff just made it up") ... that's exactly how bunk gets made in the first place." — providing a simpler explanation for the "evidence" you cite is precisely how debunks get made.

You'rd arguing that, because some people believed something, it must be true. While that's a common way to argue, it's not convincing.
 
"because it requires assuming that BAASS, Bigelow, and Vallee all independently fabricated or misremembered the same expectations," — it simply requires they all believed Puthoff (or whoever else proposed this)

"while their DIA sponsors somehow never corrected them" — that's an unconfirmed supposition on your part. Remember, BAASS was never fully overt about their operations, and would simply have assumed that anyone who corrected them was lying, or "not in on it".

We also still do not know that these alleged BAASS documents are genuine, and not fakes.

"And if the goal is to debunk, you can't replace one unproven story (crash retrievals) with another unproven story ("Puthoff just made it up") ... that's exactly how bunk gets made in the first place." — providing a simpler explanation for the "evidence" you cite is precisely how debunks get made.

You'rd arguing that, because some people believed something, it must be true. While that's a common way to argue, it's not convincing.
Shouldn't center on Puthoff either TBH. Just as an example, the EBE references in the files (if they're real), that roots from Doty's disinformation. Puthoff and Green were also both involved in that project so.
That's at least 3 people we know that actively promoted false information in a way that may have influenced this program, all of which were involved to the program to some extent. Unrelated to the documents, 2 of them (Puthoff and Green) are known to have mentored and directed colleagues in this regard in their past. Doty, outside his wider disinformation projects, also has a record of personally manipulating individuals, including government personnel.
 
Back
Top