House Oversight Hearing on UAPs - July 26, 2023

Yes I do agree with this. However, there is certainly better evidence available. In particular, satellite imagery via SENTIENT, sigint, and other platforms confirmed a Tic-Tac like object in this NRO report, which was then forwarded to AARO as being a possible UAP. So, upon first inspection by analysts, which was Grusch's job previously, and he also stated, under oath, that he had personally analyzed objects which "defied the laws of physics".
https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...tem-captures-possible-tic-tac-object-in-2021/
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.
 
The way I read between the lines, and this is only my speculation, is that he was shown evidence of a craft moving in ways beyond normal propulsion, and it was his assessment that it must be experimental US technology.
if GOFAST hadn't been claimed to be that (and isn't), I'd be more excited.
Right now I'm thinking, "it's probably another badly supported claim that turns out to be bunk". Heck, that "evidence" could even be GOFAST. Or the GIMBAL "j-hook" bunk.
 
Last edited:
As noted in the ICIG complaint, he made an earlier DOD IG complaint in July 2021 about UAP-related urgent concerns. Have we ever heard what the DOD IG did with that complaint, was an investigation launched, what is the status of that?
The DoD IG didn't do anything, says Grusch in his IC IG complaint.
See https://www.metabunk.org/threads/david-gruschs-dopsr-cleared-statement-and-ig-complaint.12989/ .


In order to find an urgent concern “credible,” the IC IG must be in possession of reliable, first-hand information. The IC IG cannot transmit information via the ICWPA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.
Grusch's claims were found to be "urgent and credible".
Source: Background Information on ICWPA Process info sheet.
Therefore, at least one primary witness must have testified to the IC IG.
That's not in evidence. Compare:
The ICIG found Mr. Grusch’s assertion that information was inappropriately concealed from Congress to be urgent and credible in response to the filed disclosure.

Compass Rose clarifies here that the ruling was based "on the filed disclosure".

The IC IG complaint is about Grusch suffering retaliation.

The DoD complaint may be about some projects being improperly funded, or evading reporting requirements. I base this opinion off Grusch's HOC testimony; it seems like Grusch may have had direct evidence of that.

There's nothing that says Grusch's UFO information was thought credible by an Inspector General, and in fact the DoD IG (who may know more about what goes on in the DoD) thought it wasn't credible.
 
Burchett indicated that they did talk to people but their information was very compartmentalized in a podcast. He also stated he believes secret UAP programs are run by defence contractors where they are free from FOI requests and congressional oversight.
That UFO Podcast on Youtube

It's a short 6:10 interview. To sum up:

  • Burchett didn't seem to learn anything new in the SCIF.
  • The programs they are looking into are highly compartmentalized and very narrow in scope.
  • The people they talked to are truthful, but limited in what they can say or know do to the compartmentalization.
  • After denial about UFOs for years, "someone" (Grusch?) is telling him they're real, but that they can't find them.
  • If these UFOs still exist, they are likely held by defense contractors beyond his oversight.
  • Unless an employee from these companies that have the UFOs comes forward, we may never get to the bottom of this.
  • He'll try to have more hearings with DoD personnel and the defense contractors.

If anyone was thinking this SCIF would be a blockbuster leading to discloser, that doesn't seem to be the case. Burchett is one of the congresses' biggest UFO proponents and he's basically falling back on the "we can't find the UFOs, because the defense contractors have them" excuse.

This claim has been around for years and is nothing new. It's a way to move the goal posts. The government can't do disclosure, because the defense contractors have all the UFOs.

And which contractors? If we go with Grusch's story of the Papel UFO in the '30s, we'd be looking at defense contractors since WW2. Just off the top of my head and sticking to aero-space related contractors I can come up with: Grumman, Lockheed, General Electric, General Dynamics, EG&G, McDonald Douglass, Hughs, Northrop, Pratt & Whittney, Thiacol, Martin Marietta, Rockwell/Rocketdyne, Boeing and others. Plus, all of the smaller sub-contractors. And people will notice many of the one's I listed either no longer exist or merged with others. EG&G alone, long rumored to be reverse engineering UFOs, changed corporate owners multiple times before it just sorta disappeared into it's current owner.

And all these contractors kept they're UFOs hidden through all this? This claim could maybe use a thread of its own.

I'll share a couple of screengrabs from this interview to support my sum up.

First of all, Burchett thinks people are being truthful but reenforces what many here have said, various programs are very compartmentalized and narrow in focus:

1698424615499.png


He makes the claim that after years of denial, "someone" is telling him they do exist, UFOs that is, but nobody seems to know where they are:

1698424834146.png


1698424968181.png


So, the UFOs are out there somewhere. He says they are kept in some sort of "quasi-governmental business":
1698425144875.png


If they even exist anymore:

1698425278688.png


And since these organizations keeping the UFOs are beyond FOIA or even congressional oversight, unless someone from these organizations comes forward with actual evidence:

1698425514075.png


They can't get to the bottom of this:

1698425436216.png


So, they're not finding what they want in the government, so they have to try and get the defense contractors in and chew on them for a while:

1698425695947.png
 
(NorCal Dave shares that Rep. Burchett says, essentially:) " various programs are very compartmentalized and narrow in focus..."
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.

If all we had was "Art's Parts" type stuff, having nothing but narrow focused small groups would seem more likely.

they're not finding what they want in the government, so they have to try and get the defense contractors in and chew on them for a while
Poor unfortunate defense contractors... :eek:
 
It's a short 6:10 interview. To sum up:

  • Burchett didn't seem to learn anything new in the SCIF.
  • The programs they are looking into are highly compartmentalized and very narrow in scope.
  • The people they talked to are truthful, but limited in what they can say or know do to the compartmentalization.
  • After denial about UFOs for years, "someone" (Grusch?) is telling him they're real, but that they can't find them.
  • If these UFOs still exist, they are likely held by defense contractors beyond his oversight.
  • Unless an employee from these companies that have the UFOs comes forward, we may never get to the bottom of this.
  • He'll try to have more hearings with DoD personnel and the defense contractors.

If anyone was thinking this SCIF would be a blockbuster leading to discloser, that doesn't seem to be the case. Burchett is one of the congresses' biggest UFO proponents and he's basically falling back on the "we can't find the UFOs, because the defense contractors have them" excuse.

This claim has been around for years and is nothing new. It's a way to move the goal posts. The government can't do disclosure, because the defense contractors have all the UFOs.

And which contractors? If we go with Grusch's story of the Papel UFO in the '30s, we'd be looking at defense contractors since WW2. Just off the top of my head and sticking to aero-space related contractors I can come up with: Grumman, Lockheed, General Electric, General Dynamics, EG&G, McDonald Douglass, Hughs, Northrop, Pratt & Whittney, Thiacol, Martin Marietta, Rockwell/Rocketdyne, Boeing and others. Plus, all of the smaller sub-contractors. And people will notice many of the one's I listed either no longer exist or merged with others. EG&G alone, long rumored to be reverse engineering UFOs, changed corporate owners multiple times before it just sorta disappeared into it's current owner.

And all these contractors kept they're UFOs hidden through all this? This claim could maybe use a thread of its own.
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?
 
The UFO community has had some spectacular failures assessing the honesty of people putting UFO claims forward. Bob Lazar comes to mind.
To be fair, this is true of ANY group with a strongly held belief. It's mostly confirmation bias.
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?
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.

Grusch seems to make the same argument in his testimony. But a bit of misappropriation is different from decades long secret programs. AAWSAP comes to mind. The DIA appropriated $22 million for supposed future technology theories, and instead used the money to run around SWR, look for UFOS and werewolves, and provide a few ScyFY type papers. AAWSAP got away with it for a couple of years and with a relatively small amount of money, but eventually as it became evident what they were up to, funding at least dried up.

The argument here has never been really articulated that I know of. It's always just hinted at and suggested, as Grusch did. It seems to say that various defense contractors have recovered or were giving recovered crashed UFOs by the government to reverse engineer them. The UFOs are kept not by the government, but by private defense contractors so as to shield them from any form of government oversight.

That should still somewhere at some point create a money trail for the giving contracts, even if black. Especially if they have been going on for decades.

Now if I put on my tinfoil hat, I might argue there are no contracts, as the government wouldn't pay these companies to reverse engineer the UFOs. Rather the government would just give away the UFOs to maintain deniability, with no traceable contracts concerning them and wait for the contractors to do their job. Then the government could buy back the reveres engineered technology as legitimate products. The contractors could also sell the new technology to consumers, thus making more money, like transistors, a common example giving of UFO technology that has been reverse engineered.
 
Grusch seems to make the same argument in his testimony. But a bit of misappropriation is different from decades long secret programs. AAWSAP comes to mind. The DIA appropriated $22 million for supposed future technology theories, and instead used the money to run around SWR, look for UFOS and werewolves, and provide a few ScyFY type papers. AAWSAP got away with it for a couple of years and with a relatively small amount of money, but eventually as it became evident what they were up to, funding at least dried up.

The argument here has never been really articulated that I know of. It's always just hinted at and suggested, as Grusch did. It seems to say that various defense contractors have recovered or were giving recovered crashed UFOs by the government to reverse engineer them. The UFOs are kept not by the government, but by private defense contractors so as to shield them from any form of government oversight.

That should still somewhere at some point create a money trail for the giving contracts, even if black. Especially if they have been going on for decades.

Now if I put on my tinfoil hat, I might argue there are no contracts, as the government wouldn't pay these companies to reverse engineer the UFOs. Rather the government would just give away the UFOs to maintain deniability, with no traceable contracts concerning them and wait for the contractors to do their job. Then the government could buy back the reveres engineered technology as legitimate products. The contractors could also sell the new technology to consumers, thus making more money, like transistors, a common example giving of UFO technology that has been reverse engineered.
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.

*edit*
MoU=Memorandum of Understanding
MoA=Memorandum of Agreement
DRMO=Defense Reutilization Marketing Office
 
Forgive me - haven't waded through this whole thread. Position here seems to be:

- Grusch, bestowed with some of the highest levels of trust and clearance in the USG, trained by and operating within the highest levels of intelligence, was tasked with going to find a particular type of programme.
- He finds programme(s), and multiple people part of them.
- Spends several years investigating and vetting information (in part because of its fantastical nature).
- Parts of his findings line up with other highly cleared individuals' testimonies (recovered craft exist).
- Grusch's former colleagues and bosses line up to essentially say 'the guy's legit, not a confabulist'
- House, Senate, (and apparently White House), take this seriously enough to set up investigative bodies, provide funding, and create legislation tailored to support either these, or very similar revelations.
- Grusch, his colleagues and former bosses are confused or lying, Congress and the White House are deluded, there's simply nothing going on.

Have I got that right?
 
Forgive me - haven't waded through this whole thread. Position here seems to be:

- Grusch, bestowed with some of the highest levels of trust and clearance in the USG, trained by and operating within the highest levels of intelligence, was tasked with going to find a particular type of programme.
- He finds programme(s), and multiple people part of them.
- Spends several years investigating and vetting information (in part because of its fantastical nature).
- Parts of his findings line up with other highly cleared individuals' testimonies (recovered craft exist).
- Grusch's former colleagues and bosses line up to essentially say 'the guy's legit, not a confabulist'
- House, Senate, (and apparently White House), take this seriously enough to set up investigative bodies, provide funding, and create legislation tailored to support either these, or very similar revelations.
- Grusch, his colleagues and former bosses are confused or lying, Congress and the White House are deluded, there's simply nothing going on.

Have I got that right?
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.
 
Forgive me - haven't waded through this whole thread. Position here seems to be:

- Grusch, bestowed with some of the highest levels of trust and clearance in the USG, trained by and operating within the highest levels of intelligence, was tasked with going to find a particular type of programme.
- He finds programme(s), and multiple people part of them.
- Spends several years investigating and vetting information (in part because of its fantastical nature).
- Parts of his findings line up with other highly cleared individuals' testimonies (recovered craft exist).
- Grusch's former colleagues and bosses line up to essentially say 'the guy's legit, not a confabulist'
- House, Senate, (and apparently White House), take this seriously enough to set up investigative bodies, provide funding, and create legislation tailored to support either these, or very similar revelations.
- Grusch, his colleagues and former bosses are confused or lying, Congress and the White House are deluded, there's simply nothing going on.

Have I got that right?
If you haven't read the thread then perhaps you should not try to summarize.
 
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.
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.
 
If you haven't read the thread then perhaps you should not try to summarize.
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...
 
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.
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.
 
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.

I think everyone's aware of the classified nature of the information he's talking about, and the imprisonable risks he's said that he faces if he discloses specific information inappropriately. His colleagues, former bosses and the ICIG are supporting him. He's represented by the former ICIG. If he was a confabulist, I think that picture would look different.

Of course this isn't proof of what he says, but I think it's enough information to give him the benefit of the doubt when assessing whether he's either lying, incompetent, or delusional. Do you think there is other information that suggests that he shouldn't be taken seriously?
 
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.
 
Do you think there is other information that suggests that he shouldn't be taken seriously?

the company he keeps. :) no offense, but big red flag for me.
His colleagues, former bosses and the ICIG are supporting him
maybe him. but not his current claims necessarily.

I think everyone's aware of the classified nature of the information he's talking about
alleged classified information.
 
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.

I think everyone's aware of the classified nature of the information he's talking about, and the imprisonable risks he's said that he faces if he discloses specific information inappropriately. His colleagues, former bosses and the ICIG are supporting him. He's represented by the former ICIG. If he was a confabulist, I think that picture would look different.

Of course this isn't proof of what he says, but I think it's enough information to give him the benefit of the doubt when assessing whether he's either lying, incompetent, or delusional. Do you think there is other information that suggests that he shouldn't be taken seriously?
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.
 
Does he? legit question. i havent heard him claim any specifics.

the company he keeps. :) no offense, but big red flag for me.

maybe him. but not his current claims necessarily.

alleged classified information.
- Yep, albeit through intermediaries (Ross Coulhart, possibly others).
- *Possibly* fair, I'll give you this one...
- I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's his claims too. Again, surmising, if they thought he was credible but his claims were hokum, I doubt they'd be giving him public statements of support.
- I think it's beyond alleged. He was questioned by Reps, and volunteered that he couldn't give information, or only present it in a secure location because it was classified.
 
Grusch is free to release the IG reports, but to my knowledge he has not done so.
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.
 
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.
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.
 
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.
IG reports are not public domain documents and cannot be released by the USG. They can be released by the complainant, however.
 
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.

I think most people are reticent to critic him much, as he comes off as genuine to some people. However, his claims and the way he is presented can be looked at. Your summery:

Forgive me - haven't waded through this whole thread. Position here seems to be:

- Grusch, bestowed with some of the highest levels of trust and clearance in the USG, trained by and operating within the highest levels of intelligence, was tasked with going to find a particular type of programme.
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 was primarily in a satellite recon program, he looked at satellite intelligence.

Due to the flap around the 2017 NYT UFO story, congress mandated an Unidentified Aireal Phenomenon Task Force (UAPTF) to look into UFO/UAPs in relation to the military. In 2020 the UAPTF was headed up by another intel guy, Jay Stratton who had connections to bizarre happenings at SKR. Stratton hired TV UFOlogist Travis Taylor as "chief scientist". The UAPTF was to find instances of UAP activity and try to explain them if possible.

I'm still unclear exactly how Grusch got involved as the story is somewhat vague, but it appears he was either asked to join the UAPTF or became the liaison from the satellite intelligence program to the UAPTF. In any event, his claim is that Stratton tasked him with identifying classified Special Access Programs (SAP) that might be related to the UAPTF.
- He finds programme(s), and multiple people part of them.

His claim is that he found classified programs he was NOT allowed to be read into. But various people told him these programs were about crashed UFOs, reverse engineering, and that alien bodies had been collected. But again, he was not allowed access to these programs.

- Spends several years investigating and vetting information (in part because of its fantastical nature).
- Parts of his findings line up with other highly cleared individuals' testimonies (recovered craft exist).

His claims are consistent with a number of UFO stories that have circulated for decades from a number of people. We even started a list of people that have made similar claims or could maybe be some of the people telling Grusch these stories.

See this thread (it's only a page or 2): https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ma...ms-who-has-already-made-similar-claims.13110/
- Grusch's former colleagues and bosses line up to essentially say 'the guy's legit, not a confabulist'

Some colleagues have vouched for him as a person. They can't really vouch for his stories, because they're all highly classified, right?

- House, Senate, (and apparently White House), take this seriously enough to set up investigative bodies, provide funding, and create legislation tailored to support either these, or very similar revelations.

Without getting into the Machiavellian machinations of the current Republican slim majority in the House of Representatives, Congressman Burchett, under the influence of UFOlofists George Knapp and Jeremy Corbel managed to hold some hearings where Grusch repeated his same set of stories. There was some funding for AARO, the follow up to the UAPTF, but that was before Grusch. I don't know how much the White House is involved, if at all.

- Grusch, his colleagues and former bosses are confused or lying, Congress and the White House are deluded, there's simply nothing going on.

It's a bit more nuanced than that. Grusch may be retelling stories he believes to be true. Doesn't mean they are.

To date, after decades of these stories circulating, there is still little to no evidence for them.
 
I think most people are reticent to critic him much, as he comes off as genuine to some people. However, his claims and the way he is presented can be looked at. Your summery:


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 was primarily in a satellite recon program, he looked at satellite intelligence.

Due to the flap around the 2017 NYT UFO story, congress mandated an Unidentified Aireal Phenomenon Task Force (UAPTF) to look into UFO/UAPs in relation to the military. In 2020 the UAPTF was headed up by another intel guy, Jay Stratton who had connections to bizarre happenings at SKR. Stratton hired TV UFOlogist Travis Taylor as "chief scientist". The UAPTF was to find instances of UAP activity and try to explain them if possible.

I'm still unclear exactly how Grusch got involved as the story is somewhat vague, but it appears he was either asked to join the UAPTF or became the liaison from the satellite intelligence program to the UAPTF. In any event, his claim is that Stratton tasked him with identifying classified Special Access Programs (SAP) that might be related to the UAPTF.


His claim is that he found classified programs he was NOT allowed to be read into. But various people told him these programs were about crashed UFOs, reverse engineering, and that alien bodies had been collected. But again, he was not allowed access to these programs.



His claims are consistent with a number of UFO stories that have circulated for decades from a number of people. We even started a list of people that have made similar claims or could maybe be some of the people telling Grusch these stories.

See this thread (it's only a page or 2): https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ma...ms-who-has-already-made-similar-claims.13110/


Some colleagues have vouched for him as a person. They can't really vouch for his stories, because they're all highly classified, right?



Without getting into the Machiavellian machinations of the current Republican slim majority in the House of Representatives, Congressman Burchett, under the influence of UFOlofists George Knapp and Jeremy Corbel managed to hold some hearings where Grusch repeated his same set of stories. There was some funding for AARO, the follow up to the UAPTF, but that was before Grusch. I don't know how much the White House is involved, if at all.



It's a bit more nuanced than that. Grusch may be retelling stories he believes to be true. Doesn't mean they are.

To date, after decades of these stories circulating, there is still little to no evidence for them.
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.
 
The argument here has never been really articulated that I know of. It's always just hinted at and suggested, as Grusch did. It seems to say that various defense contractors have recovered or were giving recovered crashed UFOs by the government to reverse engineer them. The UFOs are kept not by the government, but by private defense contractors so as to shield them from any form of government oversight.

That should still somewhere at some point create a money trail for the giving contracts, even if black. Especially if they have been going on for decades.

Now if I put on my tinfoil hat, I might argue there are no contracts, as the government wouldn't pay these companies to reverse engineer the UFOs. Rather the government would just give away the UFOs to maintain deniability, with no traceable contracts concerning them and wait for the contractors to do their job. Then the government could buy back the reveres engineered technology as legitimate products. The contractors could also sell the new technology to consumers, thus making more money, like transistors, a common example giving of UFO technology that has been reverse engineered.
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.
 
Forgive me - haven't waded through this whole thread. Position here seems to be:

- Grusch, bestowed with some of the highest levels of trust and clearance in the USG, trained by and operating within the highest levels of intelligence, was tasked with going to find a particular type of programme.
- He finds programme(s), and multiple people part of them.
- Spends several years investigating and vetting information (in part because of its fantastical nature).
- Parts of his findings line up with other highly cleared individuals' testimonies (recovered craft exist).
- Grusch's former colleagues and bosses line up to essentially say 'the guy's legit, not a confabulist'
- House, Senate, (and apparently White House), take this seriously enough to set up investigative bodies, provide funding, and create legislation tailored to support either these, or very similar revelations.
That's the UFO believer narrative. It lacks evidence.

Politicians "taking things seriously" typically means that they respond to political pressure. We have various quotes from high-ranking members of the intelligence committees who are not losing any sleep over this.

"Grusch's former colleages and bosses" include a number of previously known UFO believers. There is a tweet quoted above by George that says,
"Last week, a former senior [DIA] scientist (Lacatski. ~Joe) became the 10th ex-government official, military officer or scientist to allege (or suggest) publicly that the U.S. government has recovered at least one UFO." ~Marik
But Lacatski has believed this for years¹. Lots of stuff that's not new is portrayed as if it is, even though it may already be debunked! (see e.g. Graves selling Starlink racetrack sightings as UFOs²)

- Grusch, his colleagues and former bosses are confused or lying, Congress and the White House are deluded, there's simply nothing going on.

Have I got that right?
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

UFO believers mutually reinforce their beliefs, cherry-picking "evidence" with no value (like your lights in the sky), and disregarding more mundane alternatives. They've now gotten numerous enough that they're able to exert political pressure. This has happened before in the USA, and at great expense it was found that "there's simply nothing going on". Absent better evidence, I expect the same outcome again.

¹ search his name on metabunk, e.g. https://www.metabunk.org/threads/george-knapp-statement-to-congress.13099/
² https://www.metabunk.org/threads/uaps-seen-by-pilots-shared-by-ryan-graves.13120/
³ https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ro...ineering-program-at-area-51.13109/post-301192
 
Last edited:
That's the UFO believer narrative. It lacks evidence.

Politicians "taking things seriously" typically means that they respond to political pressure. We have various quotes from high-ranking members of the intelligence committees who are not losing any sleep over this.

"Grusch's former colleages and bosses" include a number of previously known UFO believers. There is a tweet quoted above by George that says,
"Last week, a former senior [DIA] scientist (Lacatski. ~Joe) became the 10th ex-government official, military officer or scientist to allege (or suggest) publicly that the U.S. government has recovered at least one UFO." ~Marik
But Lacatski has believed this for years¹. Lots of stuff that's not new is portrayed as if it is, even though it may already be debunked! (see e.g. Graves selling Starlink racetrack sightings as UFOs²)


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

UFO believers mutually reinforce their beliefs, cherry-picking "evidence" with no value (like your lights in the sky), and disregarding more mundane alternatives. They've now gotten numerous enough that they're able to exert political pressure. This has happened before in the USA, and at great expense it was found that "there's simply nothing going on". Absent better evidence, I expect the same outcome again.

¹ search his name on metabunk
² https://www.metabunk.org/threads/uaps-seen-by-pilots-shared-by-ryan-graves.13120/
³ thread on metabunk
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...
 
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.
The posting guidelines are linked from the info bar; the link policy is something we've all run afoul of one time or another, but it's necessary (link and quote, and only then paraphrase if needed).
 
the link policy is something we've all run afoul of one time or another
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!
 
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!
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).

I'm generally a little more charitable taking people at face value, unless things seem a fair way off!
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.
 
That's why you have to read the thread.
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!

It was nearly 300 posts of us, me include and just as guilty, kicking the 'ol UFO ball around while we waited for the hearings. Maybe the thread could be split, with the first 6 pages being a separate "preamble" or just "ramble". Post #279 introduces Grusch's opening statement and might be a good place to start reading this thread.
 
Back
Top