This is a misunderstanding that keeps being promoted with SENTIENT. SENTIENT on its own does nothing, it's a system for automation and analysis across the TCPED cycle. You wouldn't "get" satellite imagery from SENTIENT, SENTIENT would automate the behind the scenes processes and you'd get the satellite imagery like you normally would.
if GOFAST hadn't been claimed to be that (and isn't), I'd be more excited.
The DoD IG didn't do anything, says Grusch in his IC IG complaint.
That's not in evidence. Compare:
Article: The ICIG found Mr. Grusch's assertion that information was inappropriately concealed from Congress to be urgent and credible in response to the filed disclosure.
If so, that would seem inconsistent with the idea that we possess captured UFOs. There would certainly be any number of narrowly focused programs on "How does this thingamajig work?" or "Why we should NEVER push the red button!" But if you had whole craft, or substantially whole craft, there would have to be some sort of overarching "study the whole thing in a holistic way" program looking at how it all fits together. If you captured an advanced fighter jet, and didn't know about planes, you might well put a focused team looking at the engine, maybe even to the level of just looking at the fuel with one team and the fuel pumps with another, etc. But there would be somebody looking at the plane as a whole to figure out not just how fuel pumps work, but how planes work.(NorCal Dave shares that Rep. Burchett says, essentially" various programs are very compartmentalized and narrow in focus..."
Poor unfortunate defense contractors...
and there it is
I've heard these contractor arguments for years as well, but have never understood them. If the DoD has/had foisted the issue of UFOs onto contractors, there would have to be contracts defining roles/responsibilities, deliverables, milestones for payment, etc. Contracts for classified programs are subject to review by not only DoD audit agencies, but by other non-DoD agencies like the GAO and IRS. The GAO in particular, which functions as the investigative service of and reports to Congress, has the authority to review all USG contracts. Why haven't they been tasked to look into these accusations?
To be fair, this is true of ANY group with a strongly held belief. It's mostly confirmation bias.
Yeah, my opinion has always been "follow the money (GAO)", but the counter I usually get is if these are illegal programs the GAO wouldn't be able to account for them.
Please expand on that, I have no idea what that means.
Even in that scenario, there would still be some type of documentation (MoU? MoA?) acknowledging the transfer of material and defining what can and can't be done with it. I don't remember how Corso addressed this, but I can't imagine anyone within the USG handing over technology like that without something in writing. Hell, I had to have a hand receipt to take 30 year old surplus stuff I bought from DRMO off base.
Seems to me you're giving Grush a lot of credit. Let's not forget Jay Stratton, Travis Taylor were also part of a DOD program (UAPTF). They are now doing the ancient alien circuit and Taylor is on a TV show dedicated to finding weird stuff at SWR. A lot of high level people in government believe weird stuff is the point I'm trying to make.
If you haven't read the thread then perhaps you should not try to summarize.
Really? Is any of what I said about him up for debate? Genuinely don't know - I haven't heard any credible criticism of him.
Noted. Wasn't really trying to summarise, just gather whether I had an accurate assessment. 30 pages is a reasonably large time investment to avoid a question everyone's free to ignore...
One major criticism is that he hasn't provided a single shred of evidence in the 150 days since the story broke. Considering he's claiming the most substantial earth altering claims on par with Jesus's resurrection, I would say providing no evidence would be a huge criticism.
I absolutely understand that argument, and would ordinarily support it. In his case, he says he has provided a lot of evidence to the ICIG. The ICIG's office has confirmed this. I understand there's disagreement whether this means the ICIG has taken his claims of craft, illegal activity, or reprisals seriously. Grusch claims it is all 3.
Grusch is free to release the IG reports, but to my knowledge he has not done so.
no offense, but big red flag for me.maybe him. but not his current claims necessarily.
alleged classified information.
It's pretty clear you have not read any of this thread to a substantive degree. Given that, please comment only to what you would like to support/refute with evidence. You are rehashing already covered ground.
- Yep, albeit through intermediaries (Ross Coulhart, possibly others).Does he? legit question. i havent heard him claim any specifics.
the company he keeps.
maybe him. but not his current claims necessarily.
alleged classified information.
Is he? I'm not sure how it works, but under questioning he was refused to answer particular questions on grounds that he didn't want to prejudice the complaint. We have different approaches with our legal system (and I get that the complaint isn't a judicial setting), but I'd be very surprised if such aa complaint was publicly released down here, before its conclusion.
That's why you have to read the thread. The alternative is all of us reiterating stuff that's already been said. If you're interested enough in the subject to reply, you can't do it from a position of ignorance, so it's worth reading and digesting it.
IG reports are not public domain documents and cannot be released by the USG. They can be released by the complainant, however.
Yes, Grusch had Top Secret (TS) clearance. Lot's of people do. It's not like getting a driver's license, but literally thousands if not tens of thousands of people obtain this clearance. My understanding, according to others here on the forum that operate in this area, is that TS clearance can be very compartmentalized and restricted to a "need to know" basis. Some have suggested that a person with a higher level of clearance my know less or nothing about a particular program than a lower-level person, because the higher-level person has no "need to know" about that program.
Grusch actually spent the bulk of his service doing Modeling & Simulation and managing R&D and intelligence programs, not necessarily doing analysis itself. He would've been acting within the management portion of the cycle.
This is exactly what BAASS way set up to do, including the hangar to put the UFO, wasn't it? To their chagrin, they never received one.
That's the UFO believer narrative. It lacks evidence.
I don't think you'll find many accusations of lying here on this forum, nor of impaired mental capacity (confusion). It is easy to misplace trust and believe things that don't deserve trust, or to misinterpret things to fit that belief. Grusch finding a secret program doesn't mean that program hides UFOs. A UFO at a radar testing range may be a plywood mockup that received its name because it reminds the staff of a flying saucer.³
Thanks for the notes. Would love to weigh in again, but I seem to be getting repeated warnings of access restrictions for inappropriate posting. I may have to take a back seat for a bit, until I can get the hang of how you're allowed to speak around here...
I've added 2 more links to the footnotes.
Oh - so you mean links to basic assertions of fact like in your footnotes here? Crikey! Loving the rigour here, but that's taking things rather seriously! I'm generally a little more charitable taking people at face value, unless things seem a fair way off!
My footnote links don't go offsite; if they did, I'd have to quote from them (or at least describe them, but quoting is safer).
We're generally dealing with conspiracy theorists here, and moderation isn't going to be arbiting who "seems a fair way off" and who doesn't.
Not disagreeing at all. But in @davo27 defense, this thing is not only 30+ pages, when I went back and looked, it goes 6 1/2 pages BEFORE there was even a hearing!
