Errors in Luis Elizondo's UFO Book "Imminent"

[Ben Harris]

This is awkward...

Elizondo caught out... on Coast to Coast broadcast.

 

[FatPhil]

The biggest person the whole ufo community looks up to, is a liar..

Technically, per politeness rules, you shouldn't call him a liar. Instead, address his arguments, which, as handily summarised in Steven's X video above, we now know to be deliberate fabrications, or lies for short.

 

[Mendel]

Most people won't realize that Elizondo not being involved in AAWSAP is a contradiction, because Elizondo only ever uses AATIP when referring to his former project.

The fun thing about this is, AATIP had no budget; it lived off AAWSAP money, which is its claim to officialdom. Anywhere you see "AATIP" officially mentioned, it refers to AAWSAP. See https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-origins-of-aawsap.12484/ and https://www.metabunk.org/threads/preview-of-luis-elizondos-ufo-book-imminent.13571/post-321553 .

And that's where the book cover is wrong, in my opinion.
If Elizondo wasn't part of AAWSAP, then his AATIP was never an official DoD program.

 

[FatPhil]

This is awkward...

Elizondo caught out... on Coast to Coast broadcast.View attachment 71242

However, he's been juggling multiple contradictory histories for years:

from Steven Greenstreet's "The UFO Lie: Shocking truth of Pentagon AAWSAP program | The Basement Office" published by the New York Post last year:

Source: https://youtu.be/watch?v=6XD4gQS_-qY

EDIT: my webserver seems to be misbehaving and the image upload is temporarily failing, but fortunately Steven provides links to all his sources on the Youtube page, so the Lue tweet I tried to screencap can be found here:

Source: https://twitter.com/LueElizondo/status/1391802246388723712

 

[Mendel]

Can someone quote the parts of the book where Elizondo mentions AAWSAP? They're included in the video (you can press play on this):

Source: https://x.com/MiddleOfMayhem/status/1830270281669366247

 

[elvenwear]

Thank you for these explanations!

Could someone who's read the book please confirm:
• Jay Stratton and Louis Elizondo run an unofficial UFO project out of Elizondo's office, that's AATIP. (Did Stratton outrank Elizondo?)

P110-111 of 312

I had recently accepted a new position as Director of National Programs, Special Management Staff, nestled within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The program managed national-level special access programs directly for the National Security Council and the White House. Specifically, I worked largely on the US government's efforts at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Now that I had broader authorities than before, Jay, John Robert, and I decided to move the remnants of the effort away from DIA and house it within my portfolio of national programs, ensuring the prying eyes of our detractors would no longer have any visibility. At the same time, Jay, myself, and a handful of government civilians and contractors would continue to run AATIP under the proverbial radar. If I did it this way, I knew no one in DoD would have access to the program, unless I specifically allowed it.

Jay Stratton is the one of the two who initially recruited Luis into the program. Once Lue had his own team, I guess Lue was in charge of the program. Luis mentions he was at the highest rate of pay for a civilian contractor, but Jay is described as a government intelligence official.

• They find and access Navy UAP reports. (Were these classified?)

I've read quite a lot from this point but so far they haven't discussed the sources of their evidence, or how they've obtained it or whether or not it is classified. In fact, they don't really talk much about the evidence at all. It's mostly stories.

• They contact the service members who filed the reports, bypassing the chain of command.
• They misrepresented the nature of their project to these people.
• That would've had the side benefit of avoiding unwelcome inquiries about AATIP.
• They solicited information from the contactees without regard to whether that information was classified.
• They led the witnesses by claiming that the witnesses saw a craft.

Yes to all of the above.

• I am assuming they did not get signed statements summarizing the phone interviews?

There's no mention of written statements. They do mention that they met some of the witnesses in person, but no mention of statements. Just did a keyword search. The word statement, does not come up in the context of a written statement about UAP.

 

[Mendel]

@elvenwear Thank you, you've been very helpful.

Spoiler: elevenwear

 

[elvenwear]

@elvenwear Thank you, you've been very helpful.

Spoiler: elevenwear

View attachment 71270

If you knew the origin of my handle, you'd realise how funny that shirt is.

 

[Mendel]

P110-111 of 312

At the same time, Jay, myself, and a handful of government civilians and contractors would continue to run AATIP under the proverbial radar. If I did it this way, I knew no one in DoD would have access to the program, unless I specifically allowed it.

Is this admitting that Elizondo kept his AATIP activity secret from his superiors?

 

[elvenwear]

At the same time, Jay, myself, and a handful of government civilians and contractors would continue to run AATIP under the proverbial radar. If I did it this way, I knew no one in DoD would have access to the program, unless I specifically allowed it.

Is this admitting that Elizondo kept his AATIP activity secret from his superiors?

Yep. I wonder if Lue was designated as the fall guy the moment Jay talked him into keeping AATIP running under his own department.

 

[CasualDebunk]

Yep. I wonder if Lue was designated as the fall guy the moment Jay talked him into keeping AATIP running under his own department.

I'm curious whether it caught Jay and the leadership off guard that Lue was able to leverage his experience into what appears to be a lucrative book deal. It makes me wonder who has really been playing whom in this situation.

 

[Ravi]

Technically, per politeness rules, you shouldn't call him a liar. Instead, address his arguments, which, as handily summarised in Steven's X video above, we now know to be deliberate fabrications, or lies for short.

I was just trying to be crystal clear, but you are right. So I deleted it.

 

[JMartJr]

Technically, per politeness rules, you shouldn't call him a liar. Instead, address his arguments, which, as handily summarised in Steven's X video above, we now know to be deliberate fabrications, or lies for short.

A Churchillian "The gentleman is guilty of teminological inexactitude" might suffice.

 

[FatPhil]

A Churchillian "The gentleman is guilty of teminological inexactitude" might suffice.

That indeed works in cases like this where the factuality of the statements is found so sorely wanting.

 

[Mendel]

thread title calls them "errors"

leave it up to the reader to decide to hold Elizondo responsible for them

 

[AllTheQuestionsToday]

I'm sure Elizondo is currently as welcome in a SCIF as Steven Seagal.

It actually seems to have been reported by several sources (at least going by what Wikipedia sources to) from reputable venues that Elizondo kept his clearance post-2017 and still consults for the government.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

Yep. I wonder if Lue was designated as the fall guy the moment Jay talked him into keeping AATIP running under his own department.

Just a note, it's not uncommon to find civilian employees like that leading programs where government-direct employees are under them. This is actually super common with SIOS roles which Elizondo was a SIOS at the time, they primarily end up as program admins. The way things work is weird though since civilian employees can't technically order government employees - although the government employee could face punishment internally for not following the directions.

Lue is not the "fall guy". We have statements from, now, Mellon, Elizondo, Stratton, and Karl Nell, indicating that everything we know about this publicly was part of a concerted influence campaign targeting government decision makers and the wider public. In Elizondo & Strattons joint statement, they definitively reference that Lue explicitly left the government to act as the public face for the effort, while Stratton remained within DoD to direct internal efforts.

Mellon reiterates this during his introductory chapter to the book.

We also have the campaign plan from Karl Nell. Now, while there is some fair debate whether or not this is the campaign plan for their effort, I raise multiple points)
A) Based off reference points in Nells campaign plan, large parts of it were taken from planning from AAWSAP (the woo stuff not the formal stuff).
B) Similar to the above, both Kona Blue and Grusch' proposed SARO include planning elements that have near 1-1 overlap with the campaign plan presented by Nell.
C) Other tangential statements disconnected from the campaign plans and other plans, but more in relation to specific individuals goals and objectives (which overlap with the plans).

 

[JMartJr]

It actually seems to have been reported by several sources (at least going by what Wikipedia sources to) from reputable venues that Elizondo kept his clearance post-2017 and still consults for the government.

He says? The government says? Some third person says?

 

[AllTheQuestionsToday]

He says? The government says? Some third person says?

The Sunday Times says it.

https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/pentagon-ufo-expert-says-secret-group-has-non-human-material-k9556s7rc

"Elizondo still holds the highest security clearances and continues to consult for the government."

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Someone had a burst of enthusiasm.

So much so that I misspelled Disclosure yet so little that I can't be bothered to fix it.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Was this AI generated?

Lyrics & video no, music/performance yes, along with some amateurish audio engineering using inappropriate tools to piece the "takes" together.

 

[MonkeeSage]

We also have the campaign plan from Karl Nell. Now, while there is some fair debate whether or not this is the campaign plan for their effort, I raise multiple points)

Potentially interesting that Knell "went public" at the SALT investor conference, where one might reasonably expect to find the next Robert Bigelow or Brandon Fugal.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

Potentially interesting that Knell "went public" at the SALT investor conference, where one might reasonably expect to find the next Robert Bigelow or Brandon Fugal.

Indeed. There is also the SOL Conference
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1QCFtod6i8
where Nell presents a powerpoint and the campaign plan at the end. He plays this off in jest but going back to my points above, some parts of it look almost exactly like some of the other actual proposals. There's also some other interesting keys throughout the slideshow. Like he talks about applying PMESII (an analytical technique) to the proposed UAP board and directing it like a counterinsurgency, which, ahhhhh. If this was any other industry, like with the energy & oil sector, this type of stuff happens there - they'd get toasted by national media and relevant audience groups.

 

[JMartJr]

The Sunday Times says it.

https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-w...secret-group-has-non-human-material-k9556s7rc

"Elizondo still holds the highest security clearances and continues to consult for the government."

But they don't source that claim. We just have to trust the accuracy of their reporting -- in the same article where it says:

Among the mysteries was footage in 2004 recorded from the cockpit of a US Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet off the coast of San Diego. In it, the pilots can be heard communicating about an object that looked like a 40ft "Tic Tac", astonished at its speed and how it seemed to rotate, inexplicably, in the air. The UAP jammed their radar in what was considered at the time "an act of war".

That does not lead me to have much trust in the accuracy of the reporting! It mushes together unrelated events in different years over different oceans involving different fleets! It is just wrong.

I don't know if Mr. Elizindo is still a consultant to the government with security clearances or if he is not. I don't even know if HE makes that claim. But this article making an unattributed claim is not convincing.

 

[FatPhil]

"Elizondo still holds the highest security clearances and continues to consult for the government."

But is he consulting for a bit of the government that the government doesn't even know exists?

 

[Mendel]

Like he talks about applying PMESII (an analytical technique) to the proposed UAP board and directing it like a counterinsurgency, which, ahhhhh. If this was any other industry, like with the energy & oil sector, this type of stuff happens there - they'd get toasted by national media and relevant audience groups.

"Counterinsurgency" sounds like the "disclosure" people are after the conspiracy theorist audience, who view the government as adversarial.

(What's the difference between directing it like an insurgency, and directing it like a counterinsurgency?)

 

[elvenwear]

The Sunday Times says it.

https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-w...secret-group-has-non-human-material-k9556s7rc

"Elizondo still holds the highest security clearances and continues to consult for the government."

I wonder if their source is Elizondo. I couldn't read that. It was behind a paywall.

 

[Duke]

The Sunday Times says it.

https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-w...secret-group-has-non-human-material-k9556s7rc

"Elizondo still holds the highest security clearances and continues to consult for the government."

As I recall, TS clearances are good for ten years, secret for 15 years. Support contractors and government agencies prefer hiring personnel who already have a clearance because it saves both time and money.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

"Counterinsurgency" sounds like the "disclosure" people are after the conspiracy theorist audience, who view the government as adversarial.

(What's the difference between directing it like an insurgency, and directing it like a counterinsurgency?)

Will respond here to this Q but may be a good idea to hit DMs or another thread if we spin out this conversation some more, starts to get super OT.
I would potentially agree with your first but my hold on that is those sorts of assessments take a lot of time and effort. I'd like to do a project covering this angle, mentioned it a few times, but it'd need quite a few people with different specialty and functional areas, I unfortunately do not have the funding to bankroll that ATM. There's still tiny tid bits we can hit on here and there though without going too formal.
This is one of the reasons I'm more careful about when/where I word things as more explicit vs offering likelihoods or just generally stating possibility. For example, we do explicitly know they are running an influence campaign - debate surrounding this is predicated off lack of understanding what influence campaigns are. Something that is likely, but not explicit, is that these individuals have set up false situations or programs (eg Kona Blue) to reframe to the public as something nefarious while obfuscating their own involvement. Something that is possible, but hard to tag a likelihood onto with current sourcing, is that this is literally an extension of the old "Aviary" (while it's the same network in SNA terms, that does not necessarily mean its an actual organized extension, could just be the result of specific individuals eg Puthoff and Doty making a re-appearance due to being some of the relatively small list of people involved in the UAP subject from that environment).

With that said, I think the higher likelihood of what happened there, is just that Nell is/was a specialist in COIN and integrating things like PSYOP in support of COIN missions. So contextually he's speaking in the language he knows. This is not uncommon in other areas where you find similar things happening. For example, I gave the energy & oil sector. You can find groups like Tigerswan which are ran by people who are specialists or experts in things like COIN and offer adjusted services for corporate sectors. There is legitimate use cases behind these concepts "crossing over" but totally fair issues with the framing (and some places that do it, like Tigerswan, absolutely practice it in a malign form). I don't do that part but these sorts of govt/mil concepts rolling into corporate sectors actually hits very close to what I do for work, it's why I use "Communications" rather than saying I do something like marketing or branding etc since I don't necessarily work in those fields and either use or integrate more unconventional approaches.
Despite them actually running an influence campaign and all that comes with from their frame, I do think that was truly an incidental reference to how they may be framing things, only because it's the language they know. We do know, they view the government as adversarial to the UAP subject, but I do not think Nell was using that reference for some reason beyond it just being the term he knows. There is the sliver of possibility the use of that term was intentional how you say, but I don't think we have enough to say that for-sure atm.

As for the insurgency vs counterinsurgency part, that is actually a hilarious question here as it'd be working in, kind of reverse? Really weird framing of the term practically and why I think he was just using it because its his learned "language". Usually when you see COIN presented in the corporate space for example, like with the energy & oil sector, even if the framing seems horrible, the actual Counter- part is relevant because they'll view things like protests against pipelines as an insurgency. You can make some really tough debates with terminology to make this a, not improper view, but definitely fair and heavy debate around its use.
That doesn't really roll here since well, it's referencing the government itself. That would make it insurgency definitively, not COIN, as you'd be working against the standing recognized government, not a group attempting to counteract its governance. I think the weird crux area here though is, they may not think its "the government" - but rather specific adverse actors within the government (sourcing from Nell on this is slim but Elizondo definitely hits that box, at least with what he presents to the public).
As for the distinction there, it's that. If you leave the resistance typology out, insurgencies target standing governments, while COIN would be counteracting insurgencies (thus, you could not operate COIN against a government actor - you could operate COIN against insurgents backed by a state though).
If you want a view on how that can present outside, probably how we generally envision insurgencies, look up the Battle for Mosul from 2016-2017. In the lead up and during the Battle for Mosul, there was a huge SOF Task Force that legitimately ran a massive functional insurgency against ISIS in the region alongside Iraqi and Kurdish partner forces. Despite it being a very interesting reverse use of asymmetric tactics against the "lesser" actor rather than targeting the 'greater" actor, it absolutely kicked ass and heavily accredited to why the actual Battle for Mosul didn't last longer. Andrew Milburn, one of the individuals who commanded the task force and oversaw the insurgency mission, has a book and a few podcasts out, fantastic gentlemen and heavily recommend his content.
If you consider resistance organizations within the typology, with Ukraine the term is coming back into full fledged form again, they'd target non-standing governments (eg insurgency in an town occupied by a foreign government, or a newly formed but unrecognized government ala DPR/LPR). During GWOT it got disfavored and thrown in with insurgency a lot outside of the few areas working with partner nations in places like Europe.
This is more for the background reads if it interests you, but here is a list of publications from an Army group called ARIS (Assessing Revolutionary & Insurgent Studies). It has a bunch of great reads covering conceptual understandings, practices, and historical case studies of things like Insurgencies and Resistance networks, alongside other concepts like Unconventional Warfare (support to an insurgency or resistance network vs Foreign Internal Defense and Security Cooperation being support to the host government). Take a pick of any they're all really good reads, the case-studies are probably the off examples since they dive into the weeds of historical examples rather than focusing on the concepts and etc, still fantastic studies.
https://www.soc.mil/ARIS/books/arisbooks.html

 

[Mendel]

Very in-depth, thank you very much!

I'm trying to pick the highlights and see if I've understood them.

With that said, I think the higher likelihood of what happened there, is just that Nell is/was a specialist in COIN and integrating things like PSYOP in support of COIN missions. So contextually he's speaking in the language he knows.

So you're kinda walking back the implications, in that you suppose that the language doesn't match the intent. He's not really planning a COIN-like campaign, he's just describing their influence campaign in terms he's familiar with in that different context.

That doesn't really roll here since well, it's referencing the government itself. That would make it insurgency definitively, not COIN, as you'd be working against the standing recognized government, not a group attempting to counteract its governance.

Well, at this point a conspiracy theorist would point out that the government has been taken over by the "deep state"...
You seem to be saying that difference between insurgency and counterinsurgency is not so much in the theory and practice, but rather in who the bad guys are. "Take back the government" sounds better than "overthrow the government", in essence.

We're still sort of on topic as we're putting Elizondo quitting his job to go public in a larger context.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

Very in-depth, thank you very much!

I'm trying to pick the highlights and see if I've understood them.

So you're kinda walking back the implications, in that you suppose that the language doesn't match the intent. He's not really planning a COIN-like campaign, he's just describing their influence campaign in terms he's familiar with in that different context.


Well, at this point a conspiracy theorist would point out that the government has been taken over by the "deep state"...
You seem to be saying that difference between insurgency and counterinsurgency is not so much in the theory and practice, but rather in who the bad guys are. "Take back the government" sounds better than "overthrow the government", in essence.

We're still sort of on topic as we're putting Elizondo quitting his job to go public in a larger context.

Spot on with the first part there. Noting of course, it totally could be the first way you mention, I just think the materials and sourcing we have does not indicate that as any greater of a potential. Everything considered though it is totally fair to add to the reasonable hypothesis category.

And for the second, somewhat, there are a lot of distinctions there still but going into all that would get super OT, I can chop it with you in DMs there if that's of broader interest, doesn't help align OT greater going into depth.

As for the "deep state" part, this is one of those interesting crux areas. So, when we talk about Irregular Warfare (the broad banner all these used terms fit under), there actually is a concept called "Shadow Governments". This reference takes two forms, but primarily have the same root. That same root meaning that, it is comprised of actors who are not the recognized decision maker(s), who are able to have outsized influence on decision making. Now, there are the two specified forms to this. There is one form, which generally you will not actually see called a "shadow government" casually in most cases to keep distinctions refined, but it would be very literal in reflection to that.
The second variant and this is relevant to a lot of insurgencies and resistance groups, etc - that would be, where your actual governing body is secretive. So, while a lot of insurgents and resistance movements may have overtly presented governing bodies, there are a lot of cases where these are simply for publicity, and those are not the individuals making actual decisions, those individuals making the actual decisions would be part of a "shadow government".
So, while "deep state" stuff may be a joke in its conspiracy form. When you do talk with these guys, there is a legitimate comparative that, yes, the US technically does have within the first referenced form. For example, major military-industrial contractors and "big finance" both comprise industries where key industrial decision makers actually do have outsized impact on politics, and individually do have the capability to alter policy and its implementation. This is still distinct from a "deep state" in the sense of, you have a bunch of people secretly running the nation.

Now, with all that considered, you could make some claims that would validate their belief or use of the term, in the way they might understand it using concepts and language they're use too. I'll use Elizondo here since we've had the most statements from him. Elizondo has made many statements indicating that there are individuals in services general staff and DoD administration who hold various beliefs that actually cause them to restrict this research. In Elizondo & cos case, they believe these woo things, and they consider it as part of their NatSec beliefs. They also believe that major defense contractors and politicians are also "in" on this. Elizondo, varyingly, has actually recognized most people would likely be participating for different intents on their own end (eg the mil contractors primary intent isnt to cover it up, its to exploit - cover it up is an intent ordered down from the primary intent) - so "in" in this context just means participating in the standing context, not necessarily the primary intent being the cover up.
This would debatably be a "shadow government" if his claims were true (I don't think a lot of them are, at least to form), but in that first form that isn't really as formal. This would be because, ultimately, it'd be reflective of an extra-governmental body exercising its undue influence on decision making as a concerted group effort.


This is where we get into a potentially sad area too that, no one is prone to conspiracies, just because you worked as an intelligence officer or an intelligence analyst - hell, even if you were actually participating in planning or implementing PSYOP or Deception efforts does not make you not-vulnerable at all, it just adjusts what your vulnerabilities are and may be, and how they could present.
We equally see that, and this isn't to say any individual is, just that it happens at broad. Although, generally, when we develop false beliefs, they still integrate things we know. So for them, while say, they have their own lingual inventory in relation to distinct matters where overlap may present with conspiracies. Like with this example "deep states" being very conspiratorial and conspiracy theory land, although, "shadow governments" are a real thing that can present with overlapping features. Someone starting out and knowing and understanding "shadow governments" and that side of it, could actually end up being more prone and vulnerable to developing into a false belief about "deep states" that is harder to counteract than with the average person, as there's additional informational elements integrated into the overall belief, that in this case, would be legitimate integrations rather than conspiratorial ones, and it's much harder to combat those as you'd have to draw distinctions between the elements the brain itself is pairing.
And since they pair the terms, they may be able to indicate things that are somewhat "legitimate" from that frame, but may not be taken that way, and the debate against it could end up reinforcing their view since technically the counter-point itself is not taking the correct point. This part itself though isn't super relevant to say random media readers without that knowledge already though, just following that other persons commentary.

 

[yoshy]

@Tezcatlipoca I totally support you making another thread if necessary, but please don't move your posts to DM only! They're extremely informative and interesting

 

[John J.]

With that said, I think the higher likelihood of what happened there, is just that Nell is/was a specialist in COIN and integrating things like PSYOP in support of COIN missions.... Really weird framing of the term practically and why I think he was just using it because its his learned "language".
...That doesn't really roll here since well, it's referencing the government itself. That would make it insurgency definitively, not COIN, as you'd be working against the standing recognized government...

If the use of "counterinsurgency" is deliberate, I think the term "framing" as used by @Tezcatlipoca is key.

Elizondo, Christopher Mellon and David Grusch present themselves as patriots who have served their country (which they are),
but are in a position where their strongly-held beliefs are not reflected by government statements or by "disclosure" from relevant agencies (e.g. AARO, NASA, USAF).

Much less cognitive dissonance (and more reassuring for US UFO enthusiasts who consider themselves patriots) if the "We're telling the truth, the US has crashed saucers" narrative is presented (framed) as a belief held by decent, trustworthy men "in the know", acting on behalf of the American people, which is being impeded by shadowy groups acting in an unethical (and possibly illegal or unconstitutional) manner, ergo an "insurgency".

Well, at this point a conspiracy theorist would point out that the government has been taken over by the "deep state"...

Only the (hypothetical) government employees or agencies that prevent the truth coming out (i.e. refuse to agree with the wholly unsupported allegations that recovered alien craft exist in the US, or there is proof that UAP are alien technology).

By framing their efforts as akin to a counterinsurgency, Nell is subtly reaffirming the loyalty of key "believers" to American institutions, the American public and the believer's former services/ agencies (on which some of their credibility depends).

You seem to be saying that difference between insurgency and counterinsurgency is not so much in the theory and practice, but rather in who the bad guys are.

In a literal (political and military) context, there are differences in some areas- counterinsurgency might aim to protect and shore up faith in state institutions (the political system, law courts and policing, "approved" newspapers/ broadcasters, pro-state church/ religious leaders, symbols of national unity etc.) whereas insurgents often target these interests, sometimes setting up parallel 'institutions' in areas where they have influence.

At the tactical level, some nations have learnt lessons from the many anti-colonial and pro-Marxist insurgencies in the second half of the 20th century, so that small-unit military actions against insurgents might be very similar to the techniques used by the insurgents themselves, e.g. targeted assassinations; relatively constrained attacks against identified insurgent HQs/ 'safehouses'; covert patrolling and ambushes of enemy fighters in rural/ forested areas; provision of clinics/ water supplies etc. by troops in unaffiliated settlements which might otherwise be won over by the insurgency- "hearts and minds".

"Insurgency" isn't (AFAIK) a politically loaded term in itself, e.g. during the Cold War a hypothetical Western government might support the insurgency against the Marxist Ethiopian government, or the Contras in Nicaragua, while opposing insurgent movements in the Philippines or El Salvador, but use the term insurgency for all these situations.

So depending on your sympathies, sometimes the insurgents are the goodies (maybe the Rebel Alliance, American Revolutionaries) and sometimes the baddies (maybe Islamic State, Red Army Faction).

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

"Insurgency" isn't (AFAIK) a politically loaded term in itself, e.g. during the Cold War a hypothetical Western government might support the insurgency against the Marxist Ethiopian government, or the Contras in Nicaragua, while opposing insurgent movements in the Philippines or El Salvador, but use the term insurgency for all these situations.

So depending on your sympathies, sometimes the insurgents are the goodies (maybe the Rebel Alliance, American Revolutionaries) and sometimes the baddies (maybe Islamic State, Red Army Faction).

Thanks for going into the better break down of what some of the distinctions between insurgencies and counterinsurgencies can be, I left it out since I was trying not to go too OT.

Insurgency is partly a loaded term but not in technicality, so mostly correct. It's only loaded in the same sense that "resistance" or "extremist group" (not terrorism) is when used for more explicit messaging over casual reference. Most of that stuff is word games anyways, a lot of that stuff actually is not mutually exclusive outside of perceptive use.
For example like "terrorist" or "freedom fighter". Hilariously outside of that debate, both are true, you can be part of a resistance group seeking freedom from occupation (freedom fighter) in a group agreeable to outsized acts violence and due to that you may use tactics which fall into definition based categories of terrorism (terrorist if conducting said acts). There are some examples of this kind of co-interaction with resistance groups in occupied areas of Ukraine that've made use of outsized public acts of violence to induce fear amongst occupational authorities. Gets NSFW so not giving the examples but it's happened a few times.

If the use of "counterinsurgency" is deliberate, I think the term "framing" as used by @Tezcatlipoca is key.

Elizondo, Christopher Mellon and David Grusch present themselves as patriots who have served their country (which they are),
but are in a position where their strongly-held beliefs are not reflected by government statements or by "disclosure" from relevant agencies (e.g. AARO, NASA, USAF).

Much less cognitive dissonance (and more reassuring for US UFO enthusiasts who consider themselves patriots) if the "We're telling the truth, the US has crashed saucers" narrative is presented (framed) as a belief held by decent, trustworthy men "in the know", acting on behalf of the American people, which is being impeded by shadowy groups acting in an unethical (and possibly illegal or unconstitutional) manner, ergo an "insurgency".


Only the (hypothetical) government employees or agencies that prevent the truth coming out (i.e. refuse to agree with the wholly unsupported allegations that recovered alien craft exist in the US, or there is proof that UAP are alien technology).

By framing their efforts as akin to a counterinsurgency, Nell is subtly reaffirming the loyalty of key "believers" to American institutions, the American public and the believer's former services/ agencies (on which some of their credibility depends).

I think this is a good break down of why they might've used that term if it was intentional and probably one of the stronger hypothesis behind the reasoning if it was.

The part about framing in the internal sense too, eg the cognitive dissonance and ported understanding of "shadow governments" to "deep state" conspiracies, I think is very well worded even outside potential intentional use of that term, in re, this is why they may take that framing still. Much better way of reasoning it than how I just pointed out its the terms and concepts they're use too so may gravitate towards those references, that does a good job at hitting into the why if it was intentional.

My only hold off on that being a greater, or even balanced hypothesis with sourcing - is that some of these types absolutely do take these things and reframe them elsewhere eg COIN in energy & oil sectors, you can find a lot of niche communication companies also that disconnect from concepts like marketing or branding etc and actually brand themselves as running things like PSYOP or IO, or integrate it. PsyGroup and Team Jorge are examples of actual branded versions of that. Cambridge Analytica falls into the integration category - a lot of their proprietary methods and etc were just commercial ported versions of their initial research for conducting things like PSYOP and Strategic Communication in support of government CT objectives - most of the people not dealing with that part of it, had 0 idea that's what it was though until they found out otherwise it wasn't just fancy political campaigning or marketing. With stuff like PsyGroup and Team Jorge though their literal brochures look like they're for governments, but, no, they're for anyone who can recognize those tiny key buzzwords and the distinctions they come with over traditional practices.

I feel like, out of all the folks here that're active, you may be one of the folks that knows that sort of stuff happens and its not really rare. Nell as an individual absolutely overlaps with a lot of traits and features you generally see with the guys who do that, just getting into the weeds with that is really hard to assess - plus that doesn't for sure mean he would use it in that sense either, over say, the intentional use potential.

 

[elvenwear]

Can someone quote the parts of the book where Elizondo mentions AAWSAP? They're included in the video (you can press play on this):

Source: https://x.com/MiddleOfMayhem/status/1830270281669366247

P19 of 312

In addition to the evidence Lue presented regarding recurring military encounters with UAP, Lue also made me aware of an investigation into the UAP issue that had been undertaken by an aerospace contractor using $22million in DoD funds earmarked for UAP analysis by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in 2008. For my purposes, the most notable and useful information developed by the Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Application Program (AAWSAP) was their thorough report on the Nimitz case. Unfortunately, despite being the result of a good-faith effort by the powerful Senate Majority Leader, the Honorable Harry Reid, the US Air Force and most components of the US intelligence community refused to support this congressionally funded UAP investigation. Indeed, the Defense Department worked to kill this short-lived program at its earliest opportunity. By the time we met, what remained of Senator Reid's inspired effort was a successor initiative Lue called the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). Lue and his colleagues were doing all they could to address the issue, but he lacked a high-level advocate from within or outside the Pentagon.

p30 of 312

They had come to recruit me to support an intelligence program over at the Defense Intelligence Agency. When a DoD program needs a new person, they sometimes work their network of colleagues to find the right candidate. In this case, Jay and Rosemary's team needed a senior intelligence officer to set up counterintelligence and security for one of their programs. Jay explained that he helped create something called the AAWSAP, Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications Program, which would later become AATIP (Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program).I'd never heard of the program, and by the time the two of them left my office, I still had no idea of the program's mission. They described it as a small but highly sensitive program focused on "unconventional technologies," and said they reported directly to the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and to Congress. Some of my past experiences working for Army intelligence had involved protecting high-end and sensitive aerospace technologies, so I just assumed that had made me a candidate. Well, if that were the case, I hoped, the bureaucracy would be minimal. Red tape is the bane of every government official's existence

P31 of 312

On the tenth floor, I found myself in a long, blank hallway with a security door and camera at the far end. Rosemary answered my knock. She offered me coffee and escorted me through the door and into a government cubicle farm full of people working. Finally, in a glass office space along the far wall, I met Dr. James Lacatski. He was a bona fide rocket scientist, with a doctorate in engineering, and looked every bit the part. Glasses and disheveled hair. A loosened tie. He knew it all, from the brute-force mechanics of Scud missiles to the intricacies of first-and second-stage solid fuel rocket booster engines. I later learned that he was one of our government's top rocket scientists." Call me Jim," he said. In a calm voice, he told me AAWSAP worked on sensitive aviation technology and needed a senior counterintelligence agent to lock down all intel about the program from the usual antagonists, foreign adversaries. They employed many outside contractors, but Jim deliberately handpicked a small cadre of intelligence officers to manage and oversee the work performed by contractors. Nestled deep inside DIA, a member of the US intelligence community(the IC), AAWSAP drew its authority directly from Congress, according to Jim. Nothing I'd heard up until now sounded unusual, except that I still didn't know what the program actually did. After a brief discussion about my experience protecting advanced aerospace technology, Jim paused. The silence between us grew. Then he asked, "What do you think about UFOs?" What the—? I thought. Is this a joke? Is he testing me in some way?" I don't . . ." I said.

P32 of 312

Jim pounced. "What? You don't believe UFOs are real?" I did not say that," I responded. "What I mean is I have no reason to think about them. All of my work has focused on other issues." None of my professional projects had ever touched on the topic, nor was I particularly interested. In my personal life, I had never been fascinated by the topic. I never got into Star Wars or Star Trek, and hadn't even seen Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Jim peered at me over his glasses. "That's fair. But don't let your analytical bias get the best of you. You might see things that will challenge your current perception of the universe, of reality. You must be prepared to change your opinion in the face of new data and evidence." What he may or may not have known is that I did have some experience in looking beyond the average person's understanding of reality, which I'll get to later. He explained that AAWSAP focused on "unusual phenomena" and investigated unidentified aircraft, specifically ones that seem to display beyond-next-generation technology and capabilities—what we now call unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAP, or what were long referred to as UFOs. Jim explained that for decades, civilians, military personnel, and l aw enforcement officers had reported strange sightings across the world, and there was actually data to support what they saw. Data collected by the same intelligence-gathering systems used to keep our country safe from our adversaries, arguably the most advanced in the world. Jim emphasized that what they focused on didn't conform to physics as we understood it.

P33 of 312

I trusted John even more than I trust myself. He and I had been on many of the same handpicked missions. John revealed to me that he was a liaison between the three-letter agency he worked for and AAWSAP. Hearing him vouch for the program made my head spin.

P62 of 312

The new job at AAWSAP/AATIP was like one of those Russian dolls, one tiny secret tucked within another. Soon after I started working with them, Jay and Jim began briefing me on the program in a SCIF.
...
While the program was primarily focused on UAP, a small part of the effort also investigated unexplainable phenomena at a 480-acre property in Utah called Skinwalker Ranch. Bob Bigelow was the contractor running point on the investigation and had bought the land in the mid-1990s so that his scientists could study some of the unusual occurrences long associated with the property. At the beginning, that's all I knew. It would be months before I fully comprehended the breadth of the Utah study. It turns out that since the contract started in 2008, teams of researchers had been going out to the ranch to investigate and collect data on anomalous activity, including UAP sightings. AAWSAP's investigators treaded the property with a good deal of perfectly functioning, modern electronic equipment, determined to figure out why visitors would see strange apparitions and report terrifying experiences that not only injured people, but followed them home and began to harass their loved ones. I later learned that Jay had coined the term that now describes this—"the hitchhiker effect."

P80-81 of 312

Historically, religious institutions have been apprehensive to publicly discuss the topic of UAP and have locked these stories down. UAP don't exactly comport to the notion of man and his pre-eminence on this planet. For example, it's difficult to say, "God created man in His own image," when we are forced to inquire whether humans really look like God, or if God has a favorite intelligent species among all others in His Creation. Neither governments nor religions want their followers questioning their faith or authority. But as I would find out later, Catholicism and now even Islam are beginning to prepare the public for the long-understood idea that humankind is not alone. Even before I'd come aboard, Hal conceived and commissioned fascinating studies for AAWSAP/AATIP, including invisibility cloaking, traversable wormholes and stargates, antigravity, brain/machine interfaces, and warp drives. These studies would later be known as the thirty-eight Defense Intelligence Research Documents (DIRDs). Each commissioned study was from a top scientist who was an expert on technology concepts that might apply to the UAP problem. Hal cleverly made sure these studies could be applied to any conceivable weapon system, not just UAP. This was another layer of protection, to hide the true mission of the overall effort. Later, I would do the same thing in order to keep AATIP viable.

P81-82 of 312

Religious fundamentalists within the chain of command and Capitol Hill began asking pointed questions about the program and its efficacy: more specifically, are these unusual methods paranormal or even demonic? General Albert Stubblebine, who headed up the psychic program—and was nicknamed "General Spoon Bender"—once tangled with a lawmaker, saying, "Why do you care how my collectors gather intelligence, as long as it is accurate?" Theoretically, Jim Lacatski and his team ran the US's official program on UAP, but at the same time the Legacy Program was working at cross purposes to ours. In the parlance of the Pentagon, some deeply hidden black programs were so black that . . . well, they weren't even black, they were ultra black. We spoke of "purple novas"—projects and programs so secret that not even the secretary of defense or the president would ever know of them, unless they stumbled across them by accident. Remembering what Hal told me earlier, why brief someone who is only in office for a short period of time?Why jeopardize security? That was the mindset of those in the Legacy Program. Nothing is more black than the Legacy Program. Whatever the color of these programs, their discoveries would never be shared with other agencies, field activities, and branches. The information, we liked to say, was stuffed up different stovepipes, controlled by unseen barons, each with their own fiefdoms. Initially, the AAWSAP/AATIP crew enjoyed a good degree of support from DIA leadership. Memorandums to and from Lieutenant General Michael Maples and Deputy Director Robert Cardillo initially referred to the effort in positive terms. I had the privilege to read some of the feedback from these reports myself

P82-83 of 312

I'll provide more details on this later, but as time passed, it became increasingly evident to me that the tides were shifting. An increasing number of AAWSAP detractors now worked at the senior level within DIA. More and more scrutiny was being placed on AAWSAP every day and new executive leadership at DIA was getting settled into their roles. Within a matter of weeks of the transition, Lacatski began spending most of his time defending his efforts instead of conducting research. The powers that be in the ivory tower now actively tried to kill the program. If the slightest glimmer of the truth of Jim's work got released in a broader report destined for the eyes of others in power, it got kicked upstairs, where DIA's bureaucrats killed it, filed it away, or ignored it. I understood that instinct, especially from a bureaucratic perspective. AAWSAP's investigation at the Utah ranch alone aroused curiosity and uncomfortable questions. My impression was that the philosophical and theological challenges were more of a roadblock than the pragmatic or bureaucratic ones, especially now that leaders of a religious bent had taken a keen interest in AAWSAP. To some degree, I understood their apprehension; the topic is frightening, and not because of religious reasons alone. In 2010, a man I'll call Devon Woods, who previously served as a senior leader at ODNI, became a senior director at DIA. I knew him from my days at ODNI, and I looked up to him. I perceived him as noble and honest, albeit extremely religious. This all began when General James Clapper, my old boss at the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (OUSD(I)), was asked by President Barack Obama to become the new DNI. Clapper and Woods didn't always see eye to eye, but when Clapper made the move to become the DNI, he offered Woods the job at DIA regardless.
...
AAWSAP/AATIP went from being the ballroom darling to the Wicked Witch of the West, almost overnight.
...
As the new kid, I was certainly not going to tell Jim how to do his job, but I worried the powers that be had bull's-eyes fixed on Jim and AAWSAP/AATIP

P92 of 312

Two colleagues in particular were under medical care for both cutaneous and visceral injuries that were sustained from interactions with UAP while working with AAWSAP/AATIP, and we had numerous reports of negative biological effects associated with UAP encounters, especially orbs. The injuries sustained seemed to stem from some sort of directed energy exposure, almost like radiation.
...
Another colleague and good friend, who wasn't part of AAWSAP/AATIP but worked around us often, experienced these symptoms.

P95 of 312

The "Tic Tac" UAP encounter would become one of the most important in recent history and considered a "gold standard," due to the way the investigation was handled and the fidelity of information collected. Jay Stratton investigated the incident before I joined the team. He had written a detailed AAWSAP/AATIP report on the event, which is how I first learned about it.

P99 of 312

One afternoon during my early days at AAWSAP/AATIP I took my oldest daughter to lacrosse practice somewhere on Maryland's Eastern Shore, and sat on the bleachers with some of the other parents. To pass the time, I had brought along an unclassified document on the topic of teleportation, commissioned by the US Air Force. The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) had some of the best scientists working on secret technologies that we wouldn't see for another fifty years. And I was okay with that. This included experiments in quantum teleportation, light bending technology, and novel forms of propulsion.

P104 of 312

Harry Reid and his cohort of fellow senators who had supported funding AAWSAP/AATIP appreciated the concept of applying science and intellect to the UAP problem—a completely secular view that I heartily embraced. In all the work I'd done in the service, I followed the facts. To make decisions any other way seemed illogical, short-sighted, and archaic

P106 of 312

Jay and I both sensed a vibe that Jim did not. He was probably too much of an optimist to perceive the hyenas and wolves circling him. His career was on the line. I remember a meeting in the fall of 2009 that Jay and I attended with Jim, in which we openly talked about the wisdom of Jim dropping the investigations AAWSAP had gotten involved with that many considered to be dealing with the paranormal and instead focusing solely on UAP threats. I was convinced that if we produced some solid work under the AATIP banner, there wasn't a person in the Pentagon or Congress who could look away, and it would help Jim's efforts. We had found plenty of evidence of extremely advanced craft performing in ways we couldn't replicate and entering controlled US airspace at home and abroad without any repercussions. These facts alone warranted additional DoD resources. Jim refused to lose focus on the overall scope of AAWSAP/AATIP, as he felt it was all interrelated. He felt that if he could show DIA and DoD leadership the results of his efforts, any rational individual would see the value of continuing his anomalous investigations. The only problem: the briefing Jim wanted to share with leadership included words like archangels, angels, demons, and spiritual realm. A bridge, or two, too far for most.

P108-110 of 312

The program had taken on a slew of subcontractors to help with the research, but the primary firm was Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS), owned by former hotel magnate Robert Bigelow, who, as I mentioned, at the time owned Skinwalker Ranch. I liked Bob and admired his tenacity and patriotism. He spent much of his own money fronting some of the costs for AAWSAP. Unfortunately, that was part of the problem, according to DoD. In an effort to "do the right thing," detractors at DoD said the wrong things were done. In addition, to accelerate its UAP work, AAWSAP gained access to a database of civilian eyewitness accounts, intending to track down the eyewitnesses and debrief them about sightings and aircraft encounters. The names and contact information of those US citizens had allegedly been stripped out before anything went to the government, but the redacted reports had allegedly been uploaded to DoD databases, not by BAASS but by someone in AAWSAP's government chain of command. If true, this act alone is a serious violation of multiple DoD regulations and possibly Executive Order 12333. This may seem like a simple oversight, but it was all the ammunition the detractors needed to create a false impression that AAWSAP had gone rogue. Despite all the new controversy, Bob still handled himself professionally and was motivated as a patriot to always do the right thing. AAWSAP and BAASS were no different, from my observations. In the past, DoD and her sometimes naughty children—US Army Counterintelligence (CI), the Air Force Office of Special Investigations(OSI), and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)—had violated civil liberties. From spying on student unions in the 1960s to penetrating demonstrations and targeting the American Civil Liberties Union, the DoD deservedly got smacked by Congress for unethical actions. As a result, laws were created to prevent DoD's massive might from being misused. According to its detractors, AAWSAP had become an oversight nightmare from a legal and administrative perspective. Let me be clear: the nightmare was largely manufactured by the enemies of AAWSAP at DIA but was certainly effective. Personally, I never understood the need to go down the civilian experiencer route in the first place. Private research organizations already did that and did it well. We worked for the Pentagon. It was safer to confine ourselves solely to military and intelligence encounters with UAP. It was hard enough to speak to politicians and intelligence officials about UAP. I can't fault those who thought they were saving our government time and money by acquiring that data, especially if those individuals were not trained intelligence officers or did not know the legal boundaries of collecting and using certain information. I chalked it up to an honest administrative mistake while trying to do the right thing.
...
I had recently accepted a new position as Director of National Programs, Special Management Staff, nestled within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The program managed national-level special access programs directly for the National Security Council and the White House. Specifically, I worked largely on the US government's efforts at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Now that I had broader authorities than before, Jay, John Robert, and I decided to move the remnants of the effort away from DIA and house it within my portfolio of national programs, ensuring the prying eyes of our detractors would no longer have any visibility. At the same time, Jay, myself, and a handful of government civilians and contractors would continue to run AATIP under the proverbial radar. If I did it this way, I knew no one in DoD would have access to the program, unless I specifically allowed it. If we were clever, I could "dual-use" my existing funding to investigate UAP. That means that if I sent out a FLIR video to be analyzed, I could use the same budget line to analyze whether the object in the video was a Russian MiG-25 aircraft—or a UAP. The only contractors who would remain involved with Jay and me were Hal, Will Livingston, and Eric Davis. They each had legendary careers operating behind the scenes on our nation's most classified programs. Over the previous decades, they explored some of humanity's greatest mysteries for our government. They knew information that less than 0.01 percent of the human population knew. I am sure our decision was unpopular with many who were part of the original AAWSAP, but it was the only way Jay and I could figure out a way for AATIP to survive the constant barrage of internal attacks. Hal, Will, and Eric would have unparalleled access to help Jay, John, me, and the others. In classic Pentagon style, everyone would fit their AATIP work into their already packed government workloads, and we would have to be very clever with the funding.

P113

Even with all these budgetary concerns on my mind, I needed to find time for the work itself. Around this time, I spent several hours catching up with Will. Until then, I had not been deeply briefed on what he was doing. The good doctor now took me further into his confidence. Will was always a professional and never provided us with patient details. Will served as a medical advisor to AAWSAP/AATIP and Bigelow's NIDS.

P114 of 312

Under a microscope, it was still moving somehow. The doctor hypothesized that it had its own metabolism. AAWSAP/AATIP had also obtained photographs of these sorts of tiny objects from living foreign military pilots. Some of the specimens that have been removed from individuals were allegedly sent to various medical institutions, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health, and a US Army research facility at Fort Detrick in Maryland, where some of the most deadly viruses are under lock and key and the watchful eye of armed guards. Although I asked often, Will never commented to me about any involvement he may have had regarding alleged implants, but it didn't stop me from asking whenever I could.

P 131 of 312

Some of the AAWSAP/AATIP team had been grappling with a collection of cases with "experiencers" that would explore these very questions. An experiencer is someone who has allegedly had a close encounter, and has been affected in either a positive or negative manner.

P132 of 312

Whenever Will was involved and we talked about those cases, I was never privy to the names of the patients unless they self-identified to me or I referred them to Will in the first place. Will was always protective of his patients' privacy and would often remind us that his sacred trust with patients would never be broken, even at the expense of AAWSAP/AATIP. I respected him for that

P132-133 of 312

The work we did was so weird that we had grown accustomed to researchers rebuffing us once they learned that we were investigating UAP. The subject has been off-limits for "serious" scientists for decades. Verboten. Because of this, we routinely kept outside researchers in the dark. We sent scientists a piece of an alleged UAP to analyze without providing any background, a blind study if you will. Instead of us spelling out that they may be looking at a recovered piece of a UAP, they might be told that the object in question is part of some foreign technology American forces recovered. That's the only way we could exploit the expertise of conventional scientists. Will flew to California with a small team that included Colm Kelleher, a biochemist who was the deputy administrator for BAASS during AAWSAP, and the French scientist Jacques Vallée, who had US government clearances related to the investigation of UAP. Kelleher was a reputable scientist in his own right. He was smart and accomplished, and he sported an Irish accent, which, if you ask my wife, made him that much more endearing. Among civilians, Jacques is probably best known for inspiring the French scientist character played by François Truffaut in Close Encounters of the Third Kind. As a young researcher, Vallée worked with and organized the papers of Dr. Hynek of the Air Force's Project Blue Book.

P210 of 312

I wasn't thinking everyone, but a trusted few. Our friends and partners in the defense industry had skills and expertise lacking within the vast labyrinth of the Pentagon. We longed to broaden the number of experts who could analyze less-sensitive videos and offer their opinions about them. Instead of having experts get clearance and be forced to view the footage in a SCIF with us, I envisioned declassifying some videos and making them available on a secure government server. We would share the appropriate password with handpicked colleagues and instruct them to watch the videos at their leisure. With great success, AAWSAP had used the same approach to share all but one of the thirty-eight academic theoretical research papers Hal had commissioned from various scientists. Why reinvent the wheel in this case?

P233 of 312

That said, I did have some issues with each of the articles. The articles did not explain AAWSAP/AATIP, which would go on to cause confusion for years. Also, all of the articles played it a little too safe. For example, the Dave Fravor/Tic Tac article in the Times opened with a disclaimer, which read in part, "Experts caution that earthly explanations often exist for such incidents, and that not knowing the explanation does not mean that the event has interstellar origins." My colleagues and I thought that was absurd. The headline should have been "We are not alone!"

P271 of 312

I want to give a big thank-you to everyone else who worked with and supported AAWSAP/AATIP, especially Dr. Hal Puthoff, Dr. Eric Davis, Dr. Christopher "Kit" Green, Dr. Garry Nolan, Jessica, Bob Bigelow, Dr. Colm Kelleher, Dr. James Lacatski, and Jacques Vallée. Thank you all for your courage to bring about change in an otherwise stagnant machine. Thank you to my late friend, the legendary senator Harry Reid, for having the courage and curiosity to support AAWSAP/AATIP and the disclosure effort. His friendship, support, and mentorship meant the world to me. I believe he would be proud of all we have achieved.

 

[Mendel]

Thank you!

Mmmh, the audio book version seems to be subtly different from the printed edition.

The project was definitely run in a "don't let the teacher see" type of way, and Elizondo was part of it.

Even before I'd come aboard, Hal conceived and commissioned fascinating studies for AAWSAP/AATIP, including invisibility cloaking, traversable wormholes and stargates, antigravity, brain/machine interfaces, and warp drives. These studies would later be known as the thirty-eight Defense Intelligence Research Documents (DIRDs). Each commissioned study was from a top scientist who was an expert on technology concepts that might apply to the UAP problem. Hal cleverly made sure these studies could be applied to any conceivable weapon system, not just UAP. This was another layer of protection, to hide the true mission of the overall effort. Later, I would do the same thing in order to keep AATIP viable.

I had recently accepted a new position as Director of National Programs, Special Management Staff, nestled within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The program managed national-level special access programs directly for the National Security Council and the White House. Specifically, I worked largely on the US government's efforts at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Now that I had broader authorities than before, Jay, John Robert, and I decided to move the remnants of the effort away from DIA and house it within my portfolio of national programs, ensuring the prying eyes of our detractors would no longer have any visibility. At the same time, Jay, myself, and a handful of government civilians and contractors would continue to run AATIP under the proverbial radar. If I did it this way, I knew no one in DoD would have access to the program, unless I specifically allowed it. If we were clever, I could "dual-use" my existing funding to investigate UAP. That means that if I sent out a FLIR video to be analyzed, I could use the same budget line to analyze whether the object in the video was a Russian MiG-25 aircraft—or a UAP. The only contractors who would remain involved with Jay and me were Hal [Puthoff], Will Livingston, and Eric Davis.

I am sure our decision was unpopular with many who were part of the original AAWSAP, but it was the only way Jay and I could figure out a way for AATIP to survive the constant barrage of internal attacks. Hal, Will, and Eric would have unparalleled access to help Jay, John, me, and the others. In classic Pentagon style, everyone would fit their AATIP work into their already packed government workloads, and we would have to be very clever with the funding.

As to the dual nature of AAWSAP and AATIP:

the AAWSAP/AATIP crew

The articles did not explain AAWSAP/AATIP, which would go on to cause confusion for years.

Does Elizondo explain it?

Is there any information as to when Elizondo was recruited?

 

[elvenwear]

Thank you!

You're welcome.

Does Elizondo explain it? [ie The articles did not explain AAWSAP/AATIP, which would go on to cause confusion for years.]

You've got every reference to AAWSAP and I think all of the relevant context around those quotes so it appears he hasn't made it clear to you. He hasn't made the distinction clear in my mind either. At first, he describes AATIP as being a subset of AAWSAP (ie the part of AAWSAP that is not tied to Skinwalker Ranch), then elsewhere he describes AATIP as a new project to continue the program of AAWSAP. Elsewhere, he describes them as the same project ie (as AAWSAP/AATIP). Maybe I'm reading this wrongly, but he never really makes it clear.

Is there any information as to when Elizondo was recruited?

Yes. It's on P28-30 of 312. Emphasis mine.

One early morning while I reviewed a proposal from DHS, my administrative assistant poked her head in my office to tell me that I had two guests waiting for me in our reception area. It was early 2009. I wasn't expecting anyone, and I was only on my first cup of coffee. I remember staring blankly into the swirls of my coffee, waiting for one of my classified computer systems to fire up, wishing I didn't have unexpected visitors. The encryption that governed some of the technology I used was ridiculously secure, and it often took me ten minutes to pull up a single email. My assistant knocked on my door again, and introduced me to Jay Stratton and his colleague, whom I'll call Rosemary Caine.
...
They had come to recruit me to support an intelligence program over at the Defense Intelligence Agency. When a DoD program needs a new person, they sometimes work their network of colleagues to find the right candidate. In this case, Jay and Rosemary's team needed a senior intelligence officer to set up counterintelligence and security for one of their programs. Jay explained that he helped create something called the AAWSAP, Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications Program, which would later become AATIP (Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program).

 

[Mendel]

Another one for the history books:

According to its detractors, AAWSAP had become an oversight nightmare from a legal and administrative perspective.

Genuine patriots at work, skirting and breaking the law!

Yes. It's on P28-30 of 312.

So Elizondo's job at AAWSAP was 2009-2012.

You've got every reference to AAWSAP and I think all of the relevant context around those quotes so it appears he hasn't made it clear to you. He hasn't made the distinction clear in my mind either. At first, he describes AATIP as being a subset of AAWSAP (ie the part of AAWSAP that is not tied to Skinwalker Ranch), then elsewhere he describes AATIP as a new project to continue the program of AAWSAP. Elsewhere, he describes them as the same project ie (as AAWSAP/AATIP). Maybe I'm reading this wrongly, but he never really makes it clear.

The "new project" part was after AAWSAP folded in 2012, and Elizondo proceeded to UFO hunt unofficially using resources available to him through his job?

I'm already indepted to you for seeking out and providing these quotes, but could you please quote the part where AATIP is described as a subset of AAWSAP? I'm interested in what it encompassed, how it was set up, and when.

 

[elvenwear]

Genuine patriots at work, skirting and breaking the law!

He was trusted with secrets and protected by the secret nature of his work. Using that to trust and protection from prying eyes to break the law is tantamount to a locksmith robbing houses, or a forensic expert committing a murder. It's a huge abuse of trust.

So Elizondo's job at AAWSAP was 2009-2012.

The "new project" part was after AAWSAP folded in 2012, and Elizondo proceeded to UFO hunt unofficially using resources available to him through his job.

I'm already indepted to you for seeking out and providing these quotes, but could you please quote the part where AATIP is described as a subset of AAWSAP? I'm interested in what it encompassed, how it was set up, and when.

It's not clear to me when AATIP started. On the quote on page 106, he describes AATIP as being under the AAWSAP banner. He often refers to 'AAWSAP/AATIP' and this insinuates they were part and parcel.
P106 of 312

I remember a meeting in the fall of 2009 that Jay and I attended with Jim, in which we openly talked about the wisdom of Jim dropping the investigations AAWSAP had gotten involved with that many considered to be dealing with the paranormal and instead focusing solely on UAP threats. I was convinced that if we produced some solid work under the AATIP banner, there wasn't a person in the Pentagon or Congress who could look away, and it would help Jim's efforts.

In the quote from page 28-29 of 312 where he was approached by recruiters we have him saying that AATIP did not exist yet.

It was early 2009.
...
Jay explained that he helped create something called the AAWSAP, Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications Program, which would later become AATIP (Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program).

This quote from page 82-83 So Luis is saying AATIP existed in 2010 and was coming under attack. It's not clear if AAWSAP or AATIP or both were under attack.

In 2010, a man I'll call Devon Woods, who previously served as a senior leader at ODNI, became a senior director at DIA. I knew him from my days at ODNI, and I looked up to him. I perceived him as noble and honest, albeit extremely religious.
...
AAWSAP/AATIP went from being the ballroom darling to the Wicked Witch of the West, almost overnight.

In page 106-107, Luis seems to be insinuating AAWSAP was coming under pressure because of the Skinwalker side, but it is not clear whether or not AATIP is also under fire.

He had a point. There should never be anything wrong with telling the truth. But in this case, it's how you tell the truth that matters. Jim made a few adjustments to the slides, and we moved on. I felt bad for Jim. The program was his baby, and now people were trying to kill it. Jim believed with all his core that research on Skinwalker Ranch was worth pursuing. Privately, I agreed. Unfortunately, the current atmosphere within DIA was now hostile to that work, and if we were going to have any chance of success, we needed to adjust our message. Sometime after that, in the spring of 2010, Jim confided in me that he was being pressured to stop all efforts. He was about to take a meeting with Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn, hoping he could talk some sense into the deputy secretary and allay any of DoD's fears or concerns. He felt certain everything would turn out okay.

In the quote below from 110-111, Luis talks about getting a budget for his team to tide him over until 2013-2014. This ties in with AAWSAP finishing up in 2012.

I had recently accepted a new position as Director of National Programs, Special Management Staff, nestled within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The program managed national-level special access programs directly for the National Security Council and the White House. Specifically, I worked largely on the US government's efforts at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Now that I had broader authorities than before, Jay, John Robert, and I decided to move the remnants of the effort away from DIA and house it within my portfolio of national programs, ensuring the prying eyes of our detractors would no longer have any visibility. At the same time, Jay, myself, and a handful of government civilians and contractors would continue to run AATIP under the proverbial radar. If I did it this way, I knew no one in DoD would have access to the program, unless I specifically allowed it. If we were clever, I could "dual-use" my existing funding to investigate UAP. That means that if I sent out a FLIR video to be analyzed, I could use the same budget line to analyze whether the object in the video was a Russian MiG-25 aircraft—or a UAP.
...
Jay and I had done the best we could for Jim. Now I needed to see what I could do for the remains of his programs. We knew that the original money Senator Reid and his cohorts had secured for the program had runout. The original funding was programmed for the years 2008–12. Reid thought he could come up with another fresh infusion of funding to tide our investigations over until 2013–14.

The quote from 210-211 indicates he was still involved with his own program in 2015.

Instead of having experts get clearance and be forced to view the footage in a SCIF with us, I envisioned declassifying some videos and making them available on a secure government server.
...
I chose the FLIR video (aka Tic Tac from 2004), and the GoFast and GIMBAL videos from 2015. I described all three videos on a single Form 1910, which the DoD uses to request declassification of everything from documents to multimedia content.

On page 209, Luis indicates he is still operational in 2016

Before 2016 ended, I received the news from Jay that the Joint Staff had rejected assigning OPLAN Interloper an ACCM designation, our plan to lure UAP out of hiding on the open seas

The timeline I have is:-
2009 (Early 2009) Luis meets the AAWSAP team. They begin vetting him.
2009 ??? Luis joins either AAWSAP or AATIP under the AAWSAP banner (it's not clear if AATIP is created before or after he joined).
2009 ??? AATIP is created as a part of AAWSAP either before or after Luis joined.
2009 (Fall of 2009) Luis is working in AATIP under the AAWSAP banner
2012 AAWSAP is shut down
2012- Edit 2016 2017 (see post below) /Edit Luis keeps AATIP running under the radar.

The problem with denying he was never in AAWSAP is that he claims he was under their banner in 2010. He repeatedly refers to 'AAWSAP/AATIP' as if they were the same or connected programs. I think it is feasible that they hired him as they were creating AATIP so he may only ever have been under the AATIP banner but this is not really made clear. There are not a lot of specifics on dates in the text as a whole.[/S]

 

[Mendel]

The timeline I have is:-
2009 (Early 2009) Luis meets the AAWSAP team. They begin vetting him.
2009 ??? Luis joins either AAWSAP or AATIP under the AAWSAP banner (it's not clear if AATIP is created before or after he joined).
2009 ??? AATIP is created as a part of AAWSAP either before or after Luis joined.
2009 (Fall of 2009) Luis is working in AATIP under the AAWSAP banner
2012 AAWSAP is shut down
2012-2016 Luis keeps AATIP running under the radar.

The problem with denying he was never in AAWSAP is that he claims he was under their banner in 2010. He repeatedly refers to 'AAWSAP/AATIP' as if they were the same or connected programs. I think it is feasible that they hired him as they were creating AATIP so he may only ever have been under the AATIP banner but this is not really made clear. There are not a lot of specifics on dates in the text as a whole.

2017 Elizondo quits his job and goes public about AATIP

I wouldn't be surprised if 2009 was the year they bought the MUFON database; it would explain why they needed someone like Elizondo.

I think the DIA FOIA collection doesn't have any earlier references to AATIP, either?

It kinda makes sense that they grouped their in-Pentagon efforts under the AATIP umbrella so that the project would be presentable if someone inquired—and it's not really covered by the AAWSAP project mandate either. So it really looks to me like they made up their own project and paid for it with AAWSAP funds.