David Grusch's DOPSR Cleared Statement and IG Complaint

[Mendel]

Finally, the key purveyors of this narrative have known one another for decades. In the early 2000s several members of this small group also participated in a study, erroneously characterized (by the same participants) as having been sponsored by the White House, on the possible societal impact of disclosing the existence of extraterrestrials to the public, with the authenticity of the abovementioned concealed government program taken as its baseline assumption. The think tank in question was a “futures” enterprise that often worked on fringe studies, and many of the individuals involved with the study also worked for Bigelow Aerospace in support of the AATIP program.

Content from External Source

Can you cite a source that puts the origin of this narrative outside the circle of Bigelow's associates and before AAWSAP (2007)?

I've been trying find the think tank in question, and in the course of that learned the word "exopolitics", which stands for a specific segment of the UFO fringe—it doesn't seem to be a mainstream term.

Spoiler: books on exopolitics

I did find this book:

Article:

Exopolitics: Political Implications of the Extraterrestrial Presence

Michael E. Salla
Dandelion Books, 2004 - 326 pages

According to Dr. Michael Salla and many other experts in the field of ET research, for almost 70 years the US government has engaged in an extensive "official effort" of disinformation, intimidation and tampering with evidence in order to maintain a non-disclosure policy about extraterrestrial presence. States Jim Marrs, author of Rule by Secrecy and Alien Agenda: "Michael Salla presents an astounding and eye-brow raising alterative history of the past 100 years. He postulates that since at least the 1930s every major war and policy decision has been in response to an undisclosed extraterrestrial presence on Earth.
"He traces actual events, ranging from the Nazi development of flying saucers to the recent US invasion of Iraq, to this unworldly element within government and societal issues. Salla's case could be easily dismissed as fringe conspiracy theory except that it is well supported by the data, answers many of recent history's most perplexing mysteries and, with each passing year, is gaining credence with thinkers all around the globe. Read and contemplate this thesis today. Tomorrow, it may be the news headlines."

Source: https://books.google.com/books/about/Exopolitics.html

and this book

Article:

Exopolitics: Politics, Government and Law in the Universe

Alfred Lambremont Webre, Jd Med Alfred Lambremont Webre
Universebooks, 2005 - 133 pages

EXOPOLITICS is the evolution of Alfred Lambremont Webre's groundbreaking work as a futurist at the Stanford Research Institute, where in 1977 he directed a proposed extraterrestrial communication study project for the Carter White House. Exopolitics may turn the dominant view of our Universe upside down. It reveals that we live on an isolated planet in the midst of a populated, evolving, and highly organized inter-planetary, inter-galactic, and multi-dimensional Universe society. It explores why Earth seems to have been quarantined for eons from a more evolved Universe society. Exopolitics suggests specific steps to end our isolation, by reaching out to the technologically and spiritually advanced civilizations that are engaging our world at this unique, challenging time in human history.

Author Profile

Alfred Lambremont Webre, JD, MEd is known as the founding father of Exopolitics, the new political science of outer space, the science of relations between human society and other intelligent civilizations. His book EXOPOLITICS: POLITICS, GOVERNMENT AND LAW IN THE UNIVERSE [www.universebooks.com] is the evolution of Alfred's groundbreaking work as a Futurist at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), where in 1977 he directed a proposed extraterrestrial communication study project for the Carter White House.

"Alfred Webre can be regarded as the founding father of Exopolitics as a field of human inquiry. His involvement with the study of the UFO phenomenon includes work with the Carter Administration and with the prestigious Stanford Research Institute, which are impressive credentials in this most controversial of emerging sciences. His book, Exopolitics, gives an overview of the field and offers a blueprint for humanity as it moves toward taking its place on a wider stage. It is a roadmap to the stars." - Nick Pope, UFO Desk Officer for the United Kingdom's Ministry of Defense, 1991-1994

"To turn us in the direction of re-unification with the rest of creation Alfred Lambremont Webre is proposing a 'Decade of Contact' - an 'era of openess, public hearings, public funded research, and education about extraterrestrial reality.' That could just be the antidote the world needs to end its greed-driven, power-centered madness." - Hon. Paul Hellyer, former Canadian Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister under Prime Minister Pierre E. Trudeau.

"TIME magazine has an annual practice of selecting The Man (or Woman) of the Year. A more appropriate ritual for the new millennium might be to select The Mind of the Year, and if that were so, Alfred Lambremont Webre would rank high on my list of suggested nominees. Among modern philosophers, Webre finds himself one of a very select few at the center of the birth of a discipline of critical importance for the future: Exopolitics." - Paul Davids, Executive Producer of the film Roswell, starring Martin Sheen

Source: https://books.google.com/books/about/Exopolitics_Politics_Government_and_Law.html

These guys had their decade, but ran out of steam about a decade ago; if you wonder why, I recommend these (short) threads:
• https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...tion-act-2001-which-mentions-chemtrails.3437/
• https://www.metabunk.org/threads/cern-is-cracking-the-world-in-half-like-an-egg.141/
• https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ar...s-of-et-races-interacting-with-humanity.2279/

This kinda fits the timeline and the environment, the question is, is it the right crowd?
Do they connect to Bigelow, Elizondo and Grusch, and how close is the connection?

 

[Mendel]

Do they connect to Bigelow, Elizondo and Grusch, and how close is the connection?

Exopolitics Institute, Advisory Board member

Article:

Following 5 years as a staff member at PEAR (1987-1992), Dr. Smith was employed as Research Coordinator with the Bigelow Foundation in Las Vegas, NV (1992-1994). Prior to the Bigelow Chair in Consciousness Studies at the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV), before the Consciousness Research Laboratory at UNLV, and before the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) in Las Vegas, there was the Bigelow Foundation. The Foundation carried out multiple projects including: follow-ups to the Bigelow-funded Roper Report on Unusual Person Experiences; seminars on alternative health and collaborative research at UNLV; sociological field research in Las Vegas, Central NV and Alabama; research assistance to researchers such as Budd Hopkins in NY; and a radio show Area 2000, the fore-runner of Art Bells’ Coast-to-Coast program. Area 2000 featured many experts from the fields of ufology, alternative health, alternative energy, and parapsychology and ran through early 1994.

Source: https://exopoliticsinstitute.org/advisory-board-research-and-education/

But then again,

Article:

Thus AATIP was being used as a cover for an actual Mars colony program that was accepting recruits for new bases or colonies due to predicted Earth cataclysms makes a lot of sense.

© Michael E. Salla, Ph.D. Copyright Notice

Source: https://exopolitics.org/dia-propulsion-papers-linked-to-mars-colony-recruitment/

 

[NorCal Dave]

Scientific American, January 19, 2024, by ex-AARO director Sean Kirkpatrick: "Here’s What I Learned as the U.S. Government’s UFO Hunter", excerpts:

I'm thinking this could use a thread of its own? Kirkpatrick is even calling out Senator Ried in this.

 

[Mendel]

I'm thinking this could use a thread of its own? Kirkpatrick is even calling out Senator Ried in this.

I think the time for that is when the AARO historical report goes public.
The SA essay is basically just Kirkpatrick rolling his eyes and indicating Grusch is wrong, but the details are missing (see e.g. above), so any discussion would quickly bog down.

 

[RTM]

I seem to remember Kirkpatrick being seen as a great hope for disclosure not so long ago, this won't go down well.

 

[NorCal Dave]

I think the time for that is when the AARO historical report goes public.
The SA essay is basically just Kirkpatrick rolling his eyes and indicating Grusch is wrong, but the details are missing (see e.g. above), so any discussion would quickly bog down.

I got all excited and was about to start a thread. Here is the head of ARRO saying a lot of this recent UFO flap is a bunch of Skinwalker Ranch crap orchestrated by the usual suspects with help from the late Reid and other politicians. And claiming that none of them, including Grusch, will come before ARRO with their claims. I know, it's because he's a government shill and on the payroll of (insert name of nefarious defense contractor of choice here), but it was refreshing.

You're right though, we'll wait until the actual report comes out.

 

[Ben Harris]

To clarify, the DoD's approval of this document for publication does not mean it's factual or expresses the views of the DoD. In approving it for publication, the DoD is simply confirming there is nothing classified in it or that is not deemed to present a threat to national security.

Exactly. That's my take on it.

 

[Mendel]

He links to Steven Greenstreet

Kirkpatrick linked to a NYP article on the statement "taxpayer money was being inappropriately spent on paranormal research at Skinwalker Ranch in Utah".

https://nypost.com/2023/03/21/ufo-believing-pentagon-bosses-missed-spy-craft-for-years/

In August 2008, the Pentagon awarded the program’s $22 million contract to the sole bidder: Bigelow, owner of Skinwalker Ranch and a financial supporter of Reid’s political career.

From 2009-2010, led by James Lacatski at DIA, the Bigelow AAWSAP contractors chased UFOs around the world and hunted monsters at Skinwalker Ranch.

Content from External Source

According to Lacatski, he kept all this a secret from officials at the Pentagon because he feared the program would be shut down.

“They had no idea I was running Skinwalker Ranch. They had no idea whatsoever,” Lacatski bragged during a rare public interview in 2021.

But once the AAWSAP contractors began submitting paranormal reports to the Department of Defense, the cat was out of the bag.

Content from External Source

The article is very informative and one of the best unclassified reports you can find on the misappropriation of AAWSAP funds.

AAWSAP is an excellent example of a defense contractor attempting to evade oversight. And it connects to Grusch via Jay Stratton/"Axelrod".

 

[Mendel]

The article is very informative and one of the best unclassified reports you can find on the misappropriation of AAWSAP funds.

I should add that the fact that Kirkpatrick links to it indicates that it's likely largely true.

 

[Rationalman]

I should add that the fact that Kirkpatrick links to it indicates that it's likely largely true.

Steven Greenstreet has an excellent series on NYP in reference to Skinwalker Ranch and he basically lays out the whole story.

 

[NorCal Dave]

I should add that the fact that Kirkpatrick links to it indicates that it's likely largely true.

Steven Greenstreet has an excellent series on NYP in reference to Skinwalker Ranch and he basically lays out the whole story.

And Lacatski help write a book detailing exactly what they were doing. He doesn't use the word "hide" or "misappropriate" but it's hard to read the book and not see that's what was happening.

And it connects to Grusch via Jay Stratton/"Axelrod".

Yes. A direct conduit from the SWR crowd like Putohoff, Davis and Lacatski to Stratton, the head of UAPTF when Grusch was there.

 

[Stryer]

I should add that the fact that Kirkpatrick links to it indicates that it's likely largely true.

So you're expecting me, a skeptic to accept an argument from authority? By these terms Chris Mellon must be right based on the position he held.

 

[FatPhil]

So you're expecting me, a skeptic to accept an argument from authority? By these terms Chris Mellon must be right based on the position he held.

Found the guy who doesn't know the difference between deductive and inductive logic!

 

[Mendel]

So you're expecting me, a skeptic to accept an argument from authority? By these terms Chris Mellon must be right based on the position he held.

I'm basing Kirkpatrick's authority on his congress-mandated mission and access to information, something that Mellon did not have.

Scroll up a little and see how the "Grusch was right" crowd accept vague statements from people who met the ICIG once as authority; Kirkpatrick has that beat by a mile, because it's a) first-hand, b) not vague, and c) will be backed up by a report that's not hype, but will definitely be released this year.

But hey, as a skeptic, why do you doubt the account of how AAWSAP funds were used, and what did Chris Mellon say about it? What is your evidence?

 

[Stryer]

Found the guy who doesn't know the difference between deductive and inductive logic!

That makes zero sense in this context.

 

[FatPhil]

That makes zero sense in this context.

Increase the sensitivity on your sense detector then, perhaps? There's plenty there, I shouldn't be blamed if it wooshed you. However, if you'd like it spelt out long-hand: You're carrying on as if an input from an authority with expertise in a field shouldn't be given any weight in an argument. That may be true in deductive logic, only the argument itself matters, not who delivered it. However, it is not true in inductive logic, where all we can do is attempt to evaluate likelyhoods of things being true, and in such cases expertise in the field certainly does carry some weight. We're in the latter domain, not the former. And in case you completely missed all of the payload in my prior post - I'm saying that it is you who is the person who can't tell between the two.

 

[Stryer]

I'm basing Kirkpatrick's authority on his congress-mandated mission and access to information, something that Mellon did not have.

Scroll up a little and see how the "Grusch was right" crowd accept vague statements from people who met the ICIG once as authority; Kirkpatrick has that beat by a mile, because it's a) first-hand, b) not vague, and c) will be backed up by a report that's not hype, but will definitely be released this year.

But hey, as a skeptic, why do you doubt the account of how AAWSAP funds were used, and what did Chris Mellon say about it? What is your evidence?

It doesn't matter what you base his authority on. It's an argument of authority.

E.g you could base David Fravor's authority on being an experienced pilot bug It's still an argument of authority.

 

[Stryer]

Increase the sensitivity on your sense detector then, perhaps? There's plenty there, I shouldn't be blamed if it wooshed you. However, if you'd like it spelt out long-hand: You're carrying on as if an input from an authority with expertise in a field shouldn't be given any weight in an argument. That may be true in deductive logic, only the argument itself matters, not who delivered it. However, it is not true in inductive logic, where all we can do is attempt to evaluate likelyhoods of things being true, and in such cases expertise in the field certainly does carry some weight. We're in the latter domain, not the former. And in case you completely missed all of the payload in my prior post - I'm saying that it is you who is the person who can't tell between the two.

That doesn't make sense.

 

[Mendel]

It doesn't matter what you base his authority on. It's an argument of authority.

Yes. Well done.

Article:

This doesn't mean that a claim from a credible respected authority doesn't generally have a bigger probability of being correct than that of somebody who has no expertise at all; but the strength of this argument is not absolute as it's wrongfully believed by some.

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

I just wonder why you're bringing this up now.

That doesn't make sense.

I suggest reading the wikipedia article I just quoted; I found it explains the distinction quite well.

It also explains the difference between credible authority and false authority (it does matter what you base a claim of authority on).

 

[Stryer]

OK but others in a higher position, Chris Mellon has said the oppistite of Kirkpatrick. So which arguement of authority should we trust? None. We get evidence. I don't think Kirkpatrick is expecially trustworthy if I am honest. He seems to contradict himself and others in a position to know, even about mundane things. That's why I am skeptical of his claims.

 

[Mendel]

Chris Mellon has said the oppistite of Kirkpatrick

Could you cite a source, please?

He seems to contradict himself and others in a position to know, even about mundane things.

Could you cite a source, please?

Note also that there's a difference between mis-speaking in an interview setting vs. errors in an article or written report.

 

[Mendel]

Chris Mellon has said the oppistite of Kirkpatrick

Article:

In a 2016 interview with Leslie Kean published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor Forum, Mellon stated:

I highly doubt DoD or any other government agency is concealing UFO information. I participated in a comprehensive review of DoD's black programs and spent over a decade conducting oversight of the national foreign intelligence program, an almost totally separate world of secrets. I visited Area 51 and other military, intelligence and research facilities. During all those years, I never detected the faintest hint of government interest or involvement in UFOs.​

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Mellon#UFO/UAP_work

Do you want to go into Mellon contradicting himself now?

 

[Stryer]

And here is Chris talking about UAP whistle-blowers and the need for disclosure. This whole field is headache inducing.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/06/03/ufo-crash-materials-intelligence-00100077

 

[psikiwi]

And here is Chris talking about UAP whistle-blowers and the need for disclosure. This whole field is headache inducing.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/06/03/ufo-crash-materials-intelligence-00100077

What in that thread are you referring to? Not a valuable post, and I'm not clicking the link while at work...

 

[Ann K]

And here is Chris talking about UAP whistle-blowers and the need for disclosure. This whole field is headache inducing.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/06/03/ufo-crash-materials-intelligence-00100077

This article has a title beginning with the most significant word: "IF". He says there's a need for disclosure "IF" the government has material related to UAPs. But time and again we have seen governmental entities explain and debunk individual sightings only to be disbelieved by the UFO believers. "We don't have any" is a clear response to the claims of alien crash remains, but some members of the public (including some Congress members) simply refuse to accept any response except the ones they insist upon.

You cannot arrive at a correct answer if you only heed the specific answers you like.

 

[NorCal Dave]

And here is Chris talking about UAP whistle-blowers and the need for disclosure. This whole field is headache inducing.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/06/03/ufo-crash-materials-intelligence-00100077

It is headache inducing, because many of the proponents dance around and are vague in their claims. Some thoughts from Mr. Melon in the article you neglected to cite:

First we have his self-importance (bold by me):

Since 2017, my life has been dominated by efforts to help Congress and the public discover the truth about unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), what many still refer to as UFOs.

Working closely with former Pentagon official Lue Elizondo and later a group of U.S. Navy aviators, we quickly captured the attention of Congress.

To my surprise and delight, in 2020 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) adopted my proposal to seek an official report on UAP from the intelligence community.

Since AARO was established, I have referred four witnesses to them....

What if I’m helping to pry open a genuine Pandora’s box,

Am I doing the right thing working to bring what could be America’s most deeply buried secret to light?

When the opportunity presented itself during a meeting in the Senate, I asked,

Content from External Source

Note, if these claims are true and Mr. Mellon is having that much influence on the UAP subject, it kinda reenforces what Kirkpatrick is saying about a small group of the same people pushing the UFO agenda.

Then we have Mellon using the standard "National Security" and the strawman "OMG the Russians and Chinese" might have these super advanced assets:

UAP were routinely violating restricted U.S. airspace but these encounters, documented on cockpit videos, weren’t being reported up the military chain of command because of the stigma surrounding this issue. It wasn’t clear if these bizarre craft were Russian, Chinese, extraterrestrial or some combination of the above,

Content from External Source

I really like the "combination of the above" suggestion which I assume means the Russians or the Chinese are allied with aliens the operators of the UAPs? Again, as is common in this field, vagueness is norm.

I'm sure the Chinese are trying to create advanced air assets and we should be concerned with that, but I don't think they have UFO level craft. The Russians don't have shit. If they did, they wouldn't be marching their soldiers to their graves with 50 year old tanks while trying to conquer their little neighbor. They would have easily established air superiority over Ukraine long ago.

Then we get what can only be described as the "I'm not saying it's aliens, BUT...." rumors and rumors of rumors:

There are persistent rumors that the U.S. government recovered “crash materials” from UAP, and even that the government has been working secretly to reverse engineer the technology.

I have referred four witnesses to them who claim to have knowledge of a secret U.S. government program involving the analysis and exploitation of materials recovered from off-world craft.

Other sources who, rightly or wrongly do not trust AARO’s leadership, have also contacted me with additional details and information about an alleged secret U.S. government reverse engineering program.

Any recovered materials belong to the American people.

That alone may be enough to provide leads that confirm the truth of long-standing accusations regarding a cover-up of recovered off-world technology.

If we have recovered off-world technologies, our best and brightest minds should be engaged in evaluating it. Assuming UAP propulsion technology is distinct from anything known to the public, a successful reverse engineering program might bring about a revolution in energy, transportation and materials technologies.

If it turns out that we’ve had some contact with other life forms....

To the degree the U.S. has these materials....

And if any of these countries have also recovered off-world technology

Furtive activities around the planet and in our oceans are likely to continue.

Content from External Source

Mellon also lists a bunch of past UFO classics as if they're all true and would have yielded lots of valuable evidence, had our modern technology been used correctly:

Although UAP generally seem to avoid public exposure, there are exceptions. For example: the March 1950 incident in which dozens of UAP flew over Farmington, New Mexico in broad daylight; the famous flyover of Washington D.C. on successive weekends in July of 1952; the “Night of the UFOs” in Brazil in 1986; and the “ Phoenix Lights” in 1997. The next time there is a mass UAP flyover of a major city, or even an event like the incident at Chicago’s O’Hare airport in 2006, the ubiquitous video cameras and powerful radars that will cover the event are going to provide far more substantial amounts of data with ever-greater levels of detail.

Content from External Source

Maybe most relevant and important, note this article was published June 3, 2023, and makes the following statements:

Some have supplied information to the intelligence community’s inspector general, others directly to staff of the congressional oversight committees.

A number of credible individuals have shared compelling information behind closed doors in meetings with congressional staff, the intelligence community inspector general and AARO.

Content from External Source

Two days later, Kean would publish the first Grusch story. I think it's obvious, as noted above, that Mellon was working closely with Grusch prior to his going public and maybe even before his IG claims. And while Mellon uses a lot "IFs" in this article, I think it's pretty clear what he actually believes and may have been feeding to Grusch.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

It is headache inducing, because many of the proponents dance around and are vague in their claims. Some thoughts from Mr. Melon in the article you neglected to cite:

First we have his self-importance (bold by me):

Since 2017, my life has been dominated by efforts to help Congress and the public discover the truth about unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), what many still refer to as UFOs.

Working closely with former Pentagon official Lue Elizondo and later a group of U.S. Navy aviators, we quickly captured the attention of Congress.

To my surprise and delight, in 2020 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) adopted my proposal to seek an official report on UAP from the intelligence community.

Since AARO was established, I have referred four witnesses to them....

What if I’m helping to pry open a genuine Pandora’s box,

Am I doing the right thing working to bring what could be America’s most deeply buried secret to light?

When the opportunity presented itself during a meeting in the Senate, I asked,

Content from External Source

Note, if these claims are true and Mr. Mellon is having that much influence on the UAP subject, it kinda reenforces what Kirkpatrick is saying about a small group of the same people pushing the UFO agenda.

Then we have Mellon using the standard "National Security" and the strawman "OMG the Russians and Chinese" might have these super advanced assets:

UAP were routinely violating restricted U.S. airspace but these encounters, documented on cockpit videos, weren’t being reported up the military chain of command because of the stigma surrounding this issue. It wasn’t clear if these bizarre craft were Russian, Chinese, extraterrestrial or some combination of the above,

Content from External Source

I really like the "combination of the above" suggestion which I assume means the Russians or the Chinese are allied with aliens the operators of the UAPs? Again, as is common in this field, vagueness is norm.

I'm sure the Chinese are trying to create advanced air assets and we should be concerned with that, but I don't think they have UFO level craft. The Russians don't have shit. If they did, they wouldn't be marching their soldiers to their graves with 50 year old tanks while trying to conquer their little neighbor. They would have easily established air superiority over Ukraine long ago.

Then we get what can only be described as the "I'm not saying it's aliens, BUT...." rumors and rumors of rumors:

There are persistent rumors that the U.S. government recovered “crash materials” from UAP, and even that the government has been working secretly to reverse engineer the technology.

I have referred four witnesses to them who claim to have knowledge of a secret U.S. government program involving the analysis and exploitation of materials recovered from off-world craft.

Other sources who, rightly or wrongly do not trust AARO’s leadership, have also contacted me with additional details and information about an alleged secret U.S. government reverse engineering program.

Any recovered materials belong to the American people.

That alone may be enough to provide leads that confirm the truth of long-standing accusations regarding a cover-up of recovered off-world technology.

If we have recovered off-world technologies, our best and brightest minds should be engaged in evaluating it. Assuming UAP propulsion technology is distinct from anything known to the public, a successful reverse engineering program might bring about a revolution in energy, transportation and materials technologies.

If it turns out that we’ve had some contact with other life forms....

To the degree the U.S. has these materials....

And if any of these countries have also recovered off-world technology

Furtive activities around the planet and in our oceans are likely to continue.

Content from External Source

Mellon also lists a bunch of past UFO classics as if they're all true and would have yielded lots of valuable evidence, had our modern technology been used correctly:

Although UAP generally seem to avoid public exposure, there are exceptions. For example: the March 1950 incident in which dozens of UAP flew over Farmington, New Mexico in broad daylight; the famous flyover of Washington D.C. on successive weekends in July of 1952; the “Night of the UFOs” in Brazil in 1986; and the “ Phoenix Lights” in 1997. The next time there is a mass UAP flyover of a major city, or even an event like the incident at Chicago’s O’Hare airport in 2006, the ubiquitous video cameras and powerful radars that will cover the event are going to provide far more substantial amounts of data with ever-greater levels of detail.

Content from External Source

Maybe most relevant and important, note this article was published June 3, 2023, and makes the following statements:

Some have supplied information to the intelligence community’s inspector general, others directly to staff of the congressional oversight committees.

A number of credible individuals have shared compelling information behind closed doors in meetings with congressional staff, the intelligence community inspector general and AARO.

Content from External Source

Two days later, Kean would publish the first Grusch story. I think it's obvious, as noted above, that Mellon was working closely with Grusch prior to his going public and maybe even before his IG claims. And while Mellon uses a lot "IFs" in this article, I think it's pretty clear what he actually believes and may have been feeding to Grusch.

It comes pretty full circle when you realize Mellon has basically just been acting as rep for the Government Affairs portion of Elizondo & Strattons self-admitted influence campaign, he has also admitted to deceiving Congress about the real AAWSAP/AATIP, in the context obfuscating everything but the UAP related matters (which made up perhaps the smallest portion over cryptids, ghosts, and sky portals).

 

[Ann K]

@Stryer
From the Politico article:

Congress should seek a report from the ICIG on the evidence it has acquired on the issue of crash retrievals. That alone may be enough to provide leads that confirm the truth of long-standing accusations regarding a cover-up of recovered off-world technology.

Content from External Source

He makes it pretty plain that he doesn't want the truth, but wants to confirm the accusations. In other words, he only wants HIS version of the "truth".

 

[2pint]

@Stryer
From the Politico article:

Congress should seek a report from the ICIG on the evidence it has acquired on the issue of crash retrievals. That alone may be enough to provide leads that confirm the truth of long-standing accusations regarding a cover-up of recovered off-world technology.

Content from External Source

He makes it pretty plain that he doesn't want the truth, but wants to confirm the accusations. In other words, he only wants HIS version of the "truth".

Congress should seek a report from the ICIG on the evidence it has acquired on the issue of crash retrievals

Content from External Source

Seems pretty objective to me. I don't understand how suggesting a report that confirms (and by default, or denies) the accusations he's wanting "his truth". There's only one truth, and both sides of the debate need to accept that - whatever it ends up being.

Personally, I've long run out of patience waiting for evidence of NHI (*edited as I typo'd NIH and there's plenty of evidence of them )

I also don't understand why Kirkpatrick has come out with this interview prior to the official report around AARO's investigations as it just leaves things out there to be either misinterpreted or downright twisted and people calling him a liar etc. Surely waiting for the report and then making his statement would have been better, we've got no data to back up what he's saying right now and it's even more frustrating.

 

[Mendel]

Congress should seek a report from the ICIG on the evidence it has acquired on the issue of crash retrievals

Content from External Source

Seems pretty objective to me.

Tbh I don't even understand why he thinks the ICIG has that evidence.

I don't understand how suggesting a report that confirms (and by default, or denies) the accusations he's wanting "his truth". There's only one truth, and both sides of the debate need to accept that - whatever it ends up being.

yes, but he predicts the "truth" will provide him with leads for his cause.
Ι don't see the skeptic side making those kinds of predictions.

I also don't understand why Kirkpatrick has come out with this interview prior to the official report around AARO's investigations

he signed the report in december, so when his item was scheduled (is it in the print SA as well?), he may have thought that the report would be out now, or would be out soon.

as it just leaves things out there to be either misinterpreted or downright twisted and people calling him a liar etc.

he's pretty explicit, people are going to twist words anyway, and call him a liar. Delaying won't change that.

Surely waiting for the report and then making his statement would have been better, we've got no data to back up what he's saying right now and it's even more frustrating.

Yeah, well, he's hyping up his report a little. glass houses, stones.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Surely waiting for the report and then making his statement would have been better, we've got no data to back up what he's saying right now and it's even more frustrating.

It's done all the time in UFOlogy and maybe he should have waited, but giving the UFOlogy world is increasingly irate with him, maybe he just wanted to give them the whatfor on his way out. Rile them up ahead of time by saying in effect, "The AARO report isn't going to be what you're hoping for".

However, for some of his claims we do have data. The idea that AASWAP/AATIP was a UFO/ghost hunting boondoggle is something we know about. The perpetrators spelled out what they were doing in a book. That a small group of the same people have been pushing the UFO agenda for years is painfully obvious. One could even argue that if Kirkpatrick is saying "there's nothing there" then that would mean there's no data to wait for.

In addition, Grusch has repeatedly said he worked with or gave all his info to AARO and would be willing to testify to AARO, though he never has, and that AARO is hiding or dropped the ball on his claims. So, in reading the article I could also argue Kirkpatrick is putting several people on notice. He's blunt about AASWAP/AATIP, the people involved, Bigelow and SWR and whistleblowers:

The result of this whirlwind of tall tales, fabrication and secondhand or thirdhand retellings of the same, was a social media frenzy and a significant amount of congressional and executive time and energy spent on investigating these so-called claims—as if we didn’t have anything better to do.

Content from External Source

During a full-scale, year-long investigation of this story (which has been told and retold by a small group of interconnected believers and others with possibly less than honest intentions—none of whom have firsthand accounts of any of this), AARO discovered a few things, and none were about aliens.

Content from External Source

Second, this narrative has been simmering for years and is largely an outgrowth of a former program at the DOD’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) called the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), which was heavily influenced by a group of individuals associated with businessman and longtime ufologist Robert Bigelow, founder of Bigelow Aerospace. In 2009 then senator Harry Reid asked the secretary of defense (SECDEF) to set up a SAP (special access program) to protect the alleged UAP/UFO material that AATIP proponents believed the USG was hiding.

Content from External Source

As of the time of my departure, none, let me repeat, none of the conspiracy-minded “whistleblowers” in the public eye had elected to come to AARO to provide their “evidence” and statement for the record despite numerous invitations.

Content from External Source

And as mentioned there is data for his claims:

The SECDEF declined to do so after a review by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (OUSDI), and DIA concluded that not only did no such material exist, but taxpayer money was being inappropriately spent on paranormal research at Skinwalker Ranch in Utah. This is well documented in open sources, particularly in records available on DIA’s electronic FOIA Reading Room.

Content from External Source

Furthermore, it may be that more damaging information will be coming out and possibly the AARO report its self may highlight the influence of the SWR cabal:

The administrative SAP proposal package was informed by the same individuals who had been associated with AATIP. AARO’s archival research has located the administrative proposal for the DHS SAP, complete with the participants, which has been declassified and is being reviewed for public release.

Content from External Source

AARO thoroughly investigated these claims as part of its congressionally mandated mission to not only technically evaluate contemporary UAP observations but also review historical accounts going back to the 1940s.

Some are misrepresentations, and some derive from pure, unsupported beliefs. In many respects, the narrative is a textbook example of circular reporting, with each person relaying what they heard, but the information often ultimately being sourced to the same small group of individuals.

Content from External Source

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heres-what-i-learned-as-the-u-s-governments-ufo-hunter/

 

[FatPhil]

Do you want to go into Mellon contradicting himself now?

Do we know if the "Crazy ... bosses" in the headline is Kirkpatrick's view of Mellon? A lot of the evidence (of pretending non-evidence and rumour is proof of something with an vanishingly low prior) points towards Mellon lacking a scientific rationality, and it's not a huge leap from lacking scientific rationality to "crazy" (in particular in tabloid journalism).

 

[Mendel]

Do we know if the "Crazy ... bosses" in the headline is Kirkpatrick's view of Mellon?

There's absolutely no evidence for that take. Kirkpatrick didn't link that article for its headline, but for the "taxpayer money [that] was being inappropriately spent on paranormal research at Skinwalker Ranch in Utah".

 

[Ann K]

we've got no data to back up what he's saying right now

Kirkpatrick is saying "We don't have data". What on earth would you expect to be the "data to back up his lack of data"? You're asking him to prove a negative, which can't be done. Sorry, but you are just coming across as a conspiracy theorist in this instance. It's the old fallacy like "He won't give us the evidence which means he's hiding the evidence", when maybe the answer is just as simple as he says, "We don't have it".

You also say "There's only one truth, and both sides of the debate need to accept that - whatever it ends up being", but you sound unwilling to accept "We don't have the data".

 

[RTM]

Yeah, the disclosure narrative is very circular and self fulfilling. The fuzzy videos are proof that that the military is taking UFOs seriously, and the lack of/unwillingness to share everything points to evidence of a cover up.

 

[Mendel]

I also don't understand why Kirkpatrick has come out with this interview prior to the official report around AARO's investigations as it just leaves things out there to be either misinterpreted or downright twisted and people calling him a liar etc. Surely waiting for the report and then making his statement would have been better, we've got no data to back up what he's saying right now and it's even more frustrating.

You kinda wonder why Grusch has come out with this NewsNation interview prior to the official report around the ICIG's investigations as it just leaves things out there to be either misinterpreted or downright twisted and people calling him a liar etc. Surely waiting for the report and then making his statement would have been better, we've got no data to back up what he's saying right now and it's even more frustrating.

(What Kirkpatrick "interview" are you referring to?)
And Grusch actually has the ICIG response to his complaint, he's just chosen to not publish it. He hasn't even fully published his own DOPSR-cleared statements, see post #1 in this thread and the redacted Q&A later on.

Article:

this story (which has been told and retold by a small group of interconnected believers and others with possibly less than honest intentions—none of whom have firsthand accounts of any of this),

Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heres-what-i-learned-as-the-u-s-governments-ufo-hunter/

Ever since that Grusch interview, it has been obvious that nobody has a first-hand account of government NHI artefacts—if we're talking about a "lack of data", it lies with the conspiracy mongers, who try to cover it up with old, likewise unproven UFO stories (like that alleged Italian pre-WW2-UFO) and speculations about interdimensional travel (in a public House committee hearing no less)—there is zero evidence ("no data") for that either.

Kirkpatrick's article is full of links because a lot of what he writes is already well-supported public knowledge, and it is before this background that the AARO historical report is going to add AAROs research findings.

 

[Stryer]

@Stryer
From the Politico article:

Congress should seek a report from the ICIG on the evidence it has acquired on the issue of crash retrievals. That alone may be enough to provide leads that confirm the truth of long-standing accusations regarding a cover-up of recovered off-world technology.

Content from External Source

He makes it pretty plain that he doesn't want the truth, but wants to confirm the accusations. In other words, he only wants HIS version of the "truth".

Ann everyone, scientist, politician and skeptic wants to confirm or deny his or her own version of the truth.

 

[2pint]

Sorry, but you are just coming across as a conspiracy theorist in this instance.

A shame you've honed in on just one part of my response and tried to make out i'm a conspiracy theorist. Norcal and Mendal have given me thorough responses which on the whole I absolutely agree with.

I'm trying to be as impartial as possible here and hold him to the same standards Grusch and he's pals need to be held to.

Perhaps "data" was the wrong word of choice, I mean we need to see what reports AARO received and how they went about investigating them and how they came to their conclusions, is that really too much to ask for here? Why would I be willing to just accept Kirkpatricks word without any evidence he's done anything? As of now, without their OFFICIAL report all we've got is his word.

This why he should have waited until the report came out, that way he can back up what's he's saying

"He won't give us the evidence which means he's hiding the evidence"

I didn't say that so please don't try and spin it that way.

you sound unwilling to accept "We don't have the data".

I'm unwilling to accept a news article stating x,y and z without the report to show us A) what reports they received, B) how they investigated the reports received and C) How they came to their conclusions. Please tell me what's wrong with that? Without tying to make out im this or that.

Just for the record, these are the same reasons that I am unwilling to accept Grusch at his word.

 

[Stryer]

A shame you've honed in on just one part of my response and tried to make out i'm a conspiracy theorist. Norcal and Mendal have given me thorough responses which on the whole I absolutely agree with.

I'm trying to be as impartial as possible here and hold him to the same standards Grusch and he's pals need to be held to.

Perhaps "data" was the wrong word of choice, I mean we need to see what reports AARO received and how they went about investigating them and how they came to their conclusions, is that really too much to ask for here? Why would I be willing to just accept Kirkpatricks word without any evidence he's done anything? As of now, without their OFFICIAL report all we've got is his word.

This why he should have waited until the report came out, that way he can back up what's he's saying



I didn't say that so please don't try and spin it that way.


I'm unwilling to accept a news article stating x,y and z without the report to show us A) what reports they received, B) how they investigated the reports received and C) How they came to their conclusions. Please tell me what's wrong with that? Without tying to make out im this or that.

Just for the record, these are the same reasons that I am unwilling to accept Grusch at his word.

I'm exactly where you're at now. Why take this Kirkpatrick guy at his word.

 

[Mendel]

I'm unwilling to accept a news article stating x,y and z without the report to show us A) what reports they received, B) how they investigated the reports received and C) How they came to their conclusions. Please tell me what's wrong with that? Without tying to make out im this or that.

I wrote at the top of the page, "the details are missing".
I can still accept Kirkpatrick's word for what it is.

We've been discussing, here on this thread, a few days back, how Congress members met the ICIG in a SCIF, and came back with statements that some/many of Grusch's claims had "merit". There's a notable lack of detail on that.

So, if you were in Kirkpatrick's shoes, knowing what you know (assuming what he wrote in the SA article is correct), would you let that slide? Politics getting the input that Grusch is "credible"? Or would you write a rebuttal, as detailed as you could given you don't have weeks to wait for the DOPSR, that clearly indicates that the Grusch's UFO claims are a modern fairy tale with no basis in fact?

Kirkpatrick put a few barbs in his article that reveal his intent. From the opening paragraphs:

Article:

...conspiracy driven decision-making and sensationalist-dominated governance...

...sensational but unsupported claims that ignored contradictory evidence yet captured the attention of policy makers and the public, driving legislative battles...

...significant amount of congressional and executive time and energy spent on investigating these so-called claims—as if we didn’t have anything better to do...

Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heres-what-i-learned-as-the-u-s-governments-ufo-hunter/

And near the end:

Article:

Some members of Congress prefer to opine about aliens to the press rather than get an evidence-based briefing on the matter. Members have a responsibility to exhibit critical thinking skills instead of seeking the spotlight.

Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/heres-what-i-learned-as-the-u-s-governments-ufo-hunter/

These are political statements—they're not partisan, but they are political, and you won't find them in the AARO report, because that is not the place for them.
This is Kirkpatrick pushing back against the "Grusch believers" in politics.
He says clearly and unequivocally that, whatever the status of Grusch's claims regarding whistleblower retaliation or black project oversight, his UFO claims are a narrative pushed onto Congress and the public by a small group of people who have no evidence at all ("unsupported claims").

We try to avoid discussing politics on Metabunk; unfortunately, sometimes bunk makes its way into politics, and we follow. That's one reason I wrote at the top of the page that we should rather dedicate a thread to the AARO report when it comes out, than discuss Kirkpatrick's article now: there's not much in it except Kirkpatrick's own clear testimony that deals with the bunk itself, the details are missing. We agree on that.

But I disagree with you that this was a bad time for Kirkpatrick to have published this. For his political message, it was high time.

Congress should accept Kirkpatrick's word, because Congress gave AARO a task, Kirkpatrick did the task, and then Congress should use the result and not put it aside.