Immaculate Constellation - Alleged USAP focused on UAP identification and crash-retrieval

Journalist Michael Shellenberger reports a new whistleblower's claim of an Unacknowledged Special Access Program denominated 'Immaculate Constellation' created in 2017, with the objective of UAP identification and crash-retrieval.

The whistleblower's report said that "A significant volume of intelligence reports documenting first-hand encounters with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs) or Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) by DOD personnel exists within defense HUMINT [Human Intelligence] databases accessible to the Intelligence Community."

Immaculate Constellation "includes high-quality Imagery Intelligence (IMINT) and Measurement and Signature Intelligence (MASINT) of UAPs," the whistleblower's report adds. "The sources of this intelligence are a blend of directed and incidental collection capabilities positioned in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), the upper atmosphere, as well as military and civilian aviation altitudes and maritime environments."

The full article can be read at Public News (https://www.public.news/p/pentagon-is-illegally-hiding-secret)


Shellenberger previously claimed in interviews to have spoken to whistleblowers who alleged that the U.S. government possesses at least 12 crafts of non-human origin, with six being in good shape. He stated that the sources also talked to David Grusch, who testified to Congress in July 2023 about the topic.[87][88][89]

-------------------------------------------

Very interesting, but where's the Beef?
We've certainly had our fair share of Whistleblowers before, but if this is true, there should be several reports with sensor and imagery data.

As far as I Know, Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet is set to testify before congress on the upcoming hearing on November 13. Could he be the whistleblower?
 
Isn't 2017 a bit recent for something to be set up for retrievals? Is there a recent case that we isn't known about in UFO circles? Does a new department need to be set up each time a UAP crashes?

Sorry for all the questions, but stories of a new department set up around the same time as the recent lobbying efforts just smacks of more of the same.
 
Isn't 2017 a bit recent for something to be set up for retrievals? Is there a recent case that we isn't known about in UFO circles?
If there is, I don't know about it!

But more seriously, I suppose a "UAP Crash Recovery" effort could be mounted for things like the almost-certainly-balloon shot down after the famous Chinese spy balloon, not knowing what it is and so wanting to recover wreckage and find out seems sensible, and does not imply alien spaceship! You'd want to find out what you could about it if it was another Chinese balloon, or to rule out it being significant if it was in fact just a hobbyist balloon.


Sorry for all the questions, but stories of a new department set up around the same time as the recent lobbying efforts just smacks of more of the same.
"Just More of the Same" seems to be the name of the game in all this "disclosure is coming" stuff, and all this "we have crashed alien spaceships" stuff...
 
At least in the part of the Public.news article that is publicly available without paying, Shellenberger doesn't say the anonymous whistleblower(s) were themselves part of the "Immaculate Constellation" program, or that they otherwise have firsthand knowledge of NHI. It just says that one person wrote a report, and one or more (he uses plural) persons have "revealed the name" and provided a seemingly vague description of what the program is.
And now, existing and former US government officials have told members of Congress that AARO and the Pentagon have broken the law by not revealing a significant body of information about UAPs, including military intelligence databases that have evidence of their existence as physical craft.

One of these individuals is a current or former US government official acting as a UAP whistleblower. The person has written a report that says "the Executive Branch has been managing UAP/NHI issues without Congressional knowledge, oversight, or authorization for some time, quite possibly decades."

Furthermore, these individuals have revealed the name of an active and highly secretive DOD "Unacknowledged Special Access Program," or USAP. The source of the document told Public that the USAP is a "strategic intelligence program" that is part of the US military's family of long-standing, highly-sensitive programs dealing with various aspects of the UAP 'problem.'"
https://www.public.news/p/pentagon-is-illegally-hiding-secret

One other complicating factor is the false conflation of "UAP" with "NHI" or any conclusive knowledge of super-human technology. Someone will make claims about super-human technology flying around and then cite a "UAP program" as the evidence for it, without details about what that program actually does or details about what it has found and proven conclusively. A program that looks into unidentified things in the sky being in existence does not imply that the things that program looked at are NHI or super-human / off-world technology. But I see people assume that implication is there, and this implication seems to made intentionally by people who want to push the narrative of the US DoD having NHI and NHI technology.
 
Journalist Michael Shellenberger reports a new whistleblower's claim of an Unacknowledged Special Access Program denominated 'Immaculate Constellation' created in 2017, with the objective of UAP identification and crash-retrieval.
That's the year Elizondo left.
Grusch should have found this program.
And the whistleblower should have contacted AARO.
External Quote:

The whistleblower's report said that "A significant volume of intelligence reports documenting first-hand encounters with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs) or Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) by DOD personnel exists within defense HUMINT [Human Intelligence] databases accessible to the Intelligence Community."
We know this is true because that's how Elizondo got his leads. But it doesn't mean there's a concerted effort.

Every UFO progeam using military reports has been announced as such to avoid the "men in black" effect: when UAPTF or AARO contacts someone about a UAP report, they can tell the person they're interviewing who they are and why they want to know. Any "USAP" would be handicapped from the start.
 
Wasn't it Shellenberger who, about the same time Grusch was hot, claimed he had some type of proof (videos?/photos?/documents?) that supported Grusch and that he'd soon release them? Then he started backtracking, claiming he was waiting for approval from his source(s)? I don't recall if anything was released.

I remember this being discussed here, but can't find it. Anyone else remember this?
 
Wasn't it Shellenberger who, about the same time Grusch was hot, claimed he had some type of proof (videos?/photos?/documents?) that supported Grusch and that he'd soon release them? Then he started backtracking, claiming he was waiting for approval from his source(s)? I don't recall if anything was released.

I remember this being discussed here, but can't find it. Anyone else remember this?
He was claiming to have talked to whistleblowers over a year ago.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe0MxfeEV1A

That interview seems based on:
Article:
But at least 30 other whistleblowers working for the federal government or government contractors have given testimony, or a "protected disclosure," to the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG), the Defense Department Inspector General (DOD IG), or to Congress over the last several months, according to multiple sources interviewed by Public.
 
He was claiming to have talked to whistleblowers over a year ago.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe0MxfeEV1A

That interview seems based on:
Article:
But at least 30 other whistleblowers working for the federal government or government contractors have given testimony, or a "protected disclosure," to the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG), the Defense Department Inspector General (DOD IG), or to Congress over the last several months, according to multiple sources interviewed by Public.

I remembered that, but not what I was referring to. What I recall was a specific claim of photos/documents/videos in the possession of Shellenberger (or whoever), I think it was presented here as one of his Twitter posts. The claims began to be walked back fairly quickly, I remember commenting on that aspect of his claims on the thread.
 
I remembered that, but not what I was referring to. What I recall was a specific claim of photos/documents/videos in the possession of Shellenberger (or whoever), I think it was presented here as one of his Twitter posts. The claims began to be walked back fairly quickly, I remember commenting on that aspect of his claims on the thread

Shellenberger also seems to have been the person, or at least his staff, that put together a UFO briefing giving to congress before the Grusch/UAP hearings. It read like a completely credulous list of UFOlogy's greatest hits with no questioning of the claims at all. Discussed here, and in post #76 there is a link to Micheal Shermer's YouTube channel where he talks to Shellenberger, but it doesn't seem to have what you're looking for:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-congressional-uap-hearings-debrief.13077/

Speaking of the briefing, in this new article Shellenberger is calling it a "UFO timeline" created by government intell person, and he notes that AARO didn't include information contained in it:

External Quote:

And the document was missing historical information that appeared in the 117-page "UAP Timeline" document created by a former or existing US government intelligence officer that Public published last year.
So, it wasn't Shellenberger or his staff that compiled it, but it was published by Public, which is Shellenberger's sub-stack page/thing? Or just the place Shellenberger publishes on? Public also published a piece, also mentioned in the debrief thread, by an Adrew Mohar:

1728519509645.png


Thought the header to the story makes it look like Shellenberger had something to do with it:

1728519990931.png


That piece claims to have assembled 75 years worth of threats by the government to people reporting UFOs:

External Quote:

Now, Public has compiled 75 years' worth of testimony from UAP witnesses, civilians, and military personnel who say they have been threatened with death, or other forms of punishment, for speaking out publicly about what they have seen.
Including an USAF Master Sargent that claims to have done the threatening, and when that didn't work the problem got fixed "one way or another":

External Quote:

What's more, there is at least one whistleblower who claims to have issued threats to UAP witnesses. Retired U.S. Air Force Master Sergeant, Daniel Morris, reported that the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) recruited him after he served in Air Force Intelligence.

"I would go interview people who claimed they had seen something and try to convince them they hadn't seen something or that they were hallucinating," Morris said. "If that didn't work, another team would come in and give all the threats, and threaten them and their family … And they would be in charge of discrediting them, making them look foolish … Now if that didn't work, then there was another team that put an end to that problem, one way or another."
https://www.public.news/p/alleged-death-threats-against-ufo

Back to the "UFO timeline" that Shellenberger says AARO ignored, it's just a list of supposed UFOs, sightings and the cloak and dagger machinations of our old friends Hal Puthoff, Eric Davis, Jaques Vallee, Kit Green and so on. More or less confirming what Shellenberger says in the paragraph proceeding the mention of the "UFO Timeline" (bold by me):

External Quote:

The Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) "assesses that the inaccurate claim that the USG is reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology and is hiding it from Congress is, in large part," the report concluded, "the result of circular reporting from a group of individuals who believe this to be the case, despite the lack of any evidence."

The former Director of AARO has since resigned his position and has repeatedly dismissed and ridiculed the topic, claiming that talk of the phenomenon is due mainly to a small group of individuals in the grip of a rumor-based religion.
As noted above, a former or current government official has now written a new report:

External Quote:

One of these individuals is a current or former US government official acting as a UAP whistleblower. The person has written a report that says "the Executive Branch has been managing UAP/NHI issues without Congressional knowledge, oversight, or authorization for some time, quite possibly decades."
I wonder if this is the same person that created the "UFO Timeline"?

The rest of the article is behind a paywall, and since the free part is yet another rehash of Chris Mellon, Grusch and others, I'm not spending money on it at this point. IF he really has something, it'll come out.
 
Shellenberger also seems to have been the person, or at least his staff, that put together a UFO briefing giving to congress before the Grusch/UAP hearings. It read like a completely credulous list of UFOlogy's greatest hits with no questioning of the claims at all. Discussed here, and in post #76 there is a link to Micheal Shermer's YouTube channel where he talks to Shellenberger, but it doesn't seem to have what you're looking for:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-congressional-uap-hearings-debrief.13077/

Speaking of the briefing, in this new article Shellenberger is calling it a "UFO timeline" created by government intell person, and he notes that AARO didn't include information contained in it:

External Quote:

And the document was missing historical information that appeared in the 117-page "UAP Timeline" document created by a former or existing US government intelligence officer that Public published last year.
So, it wasn't Shellenberger or his staff that compiled it, but it was published by Public, which is Shellenberger's sub-stack page/thing? Or just the place Shellenberger publishes on? Public also published a piece, also mentioned in the debrief thread, by an Adrew Mohar:

View attachment 72241

Thought the header to the story makes it look like Shellenberger had something to do with it:

View attachment 72242

That piece claims to have assembled 75 years worth of threats by the government to people reporting UFOs:

External Quote:

Now, Public has compiled 75 years' worth of testimony from UAP witnesses, civilians, and military personnel who say they have been threatened with death, or other forms of punishment, for speaking out publicly about what they have seen.
Including an USAF Master Sargent that claims to have done the threatening, and when that didn't work the problem got fixed "one way or another":

External Quote:

What's more, there is at least one whistleblower who claims to have issued threats to UAP witnesses. Retired U.S. Air Force Master Sergeant, Daniel Morris, reported that the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) recruited him after he served in Air Force Intelligence.

"I would go interview people who claimed they had seen something and try to convince them they hadn't seen something or that they were hallucinating," Morris said. "If that didn't work, another team would come in and give all the threats, and threaten them and their family … And they would be in charge of discrediting them, making them look foolish … Now if that didn't work, then there was another team that put an end to that problem, one way or another."
https://www.public.news/p/alleged-death-threats-against-ufo

Back to the "UFO timeline" that Shellenberger says AARO ignored, it's just a list of supposed UFOs, sightings and the cloak and dagger machinations of our old friends Hal Puthoff, Eric Davis, Jaques Vallee, Kit Green and so on. More or less confirming what Shellenberger says in the paragraph proceeding the mention of the "UFO Timeline" (bold by me):

External Quote:

The Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) "assesses that the inaccurate claim that the USG is reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology and is hiding it from Congress is, in large part," the report concluded, "the result of circular reporting from a group of individuals who believe this to be the case, despite the lack of any evidence."

The former Director of AARO has since resigned his position and has repeatedly dismissed and ridiculed the topic, claiming that talk of the phenomenon is due mainly to a small group of individuals in the grip of a rumor-based religion.
As noted above, a former or current government official has now written a new report:

External Quote:

One of these individuals is a current or former US government official acting as a UAP whistleblower. The person has written a report that says "the Executive Branch has been managing UAP/NHI issues without Congressional knowledge, oversight, or authorization for some time, quite possibly decades."
I wonder if this is the same person that created the "UFO Timeline"?

The rest of the article is behind a paywall, and since the free part is yet another rehash of Chris Mellon, Grusch and others, I'm not spending money on it at this point. IF he really has something, it'll come out.
The "UFO timeline" was created by Shellenberger and his reporting team. This is part of that weird advertising Shellenberger does. He'll promote Public articles as if he's disconnected from them, speak as if things are not his, but even credit himself in the articles.

"Now, Public has compiled 75 years' worth of testimony from UAP witnesses, civilians, and military personnel who say they have been threatened with death, or other forms of punishment, for speaking out publicly about what they have seen."
https://www.public.news/p/alleged-death-threats-against-ufo
 
Including an USAF Master Sargent that claims to have done the threatening, and when that didn't work the problem got fixed "one way or another":
External Quote:

What's more, there is at least one whistleblower who claims to have issued threats to UAP witnesses. Retired U.S. Air Force Master Sergeant, Daniel Morris, reported that the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) recruited him after he served in Air Force Intelligence.

"I would go interview people who claimed they had seen something and try to convince them they hadn't seen something or that they were hallucinating," Morris said. "If that didn't work, another team would come in and give all the threats, and threaten them and their family … And they would be in charge of discrediting them, making them look foolish … Now if that didn't work, then there was another team that put an end to that problem, one way or another."

Daniel Morris doesn't claim to have "done the threatening" as Public appears to say, but Public does quote him as saying that
External Quote:
If that didn't work, another team would come in and give all the threats, and threaten them and their family...
If this were true- particularly if threats are made against family members- wouldn't this be illegal?
(One could imagine a scenario, perhaps more likely in past decades, where an enthusiast with a habit of 'observing' near airbases or known to listen in to defence-related radio messages might be warned off, with heavy-handed references to legal consequences, which they might interpret as a threat. But there can be no excuse for any direct threats to their relatives.)

How does Daniel Morris explain his silence- acquiescence- while working as part of some set-up threatening members of the American public who have done nothing more than report a UFO 'encounter'? -Not in itself illegal or even particularly frowned upon. Is there a law of misconduct in public office or something like that in the US?
"I was only following orders" is not a defence if the order is patently illegal.

Many people report seeing UFOs- and a small number recount seeing, even interacting with, extraterrestrials. Some of these accounts are very well-known. Why were those people not visited by Morris's colleagues?

Maybe the (claimed) rogue NRO outfit that Daniel Morris claims to have worked for had the means to distinguish between "real" UFO/ ET reports and others, and only worked to suppress the real reports. This would make sense from a HUMINT angle, leaving a large number of unprovable, inconsistent and sometimes conflicting accounts "out there" to mask the truth.

However, the logical upshot of this is that the vast majority of UFO accounts that we/ UFO enthusiasts are aware of must be false. Very few experiencers recount tales of being persuaded to change their stories, and when they don't, being threatened; by definition, none were silenced "...one way or another."
("Men in Black", arguably invented by Ufologist John Keel, have become something of a cultural trope.)
We won't know the accounts of those who were successfully persuaded by Morris, or successfully threatened, or otherwise silenced.

I'm not wholly convinced of the accuracy of Public's Daniel Morris story.
 
Daniel Morris doesn't claim to have "done the threatening" as Public appears to say, but Public does quote him as saying that
External Quote:
If that didn't work, another team would come in and give all the threats, and threaten them and their family...
If this were true- particularly if threats are made against family members- wouldn't this be illegal?
(One could imagine a scenario, perhaps more likely in past decades, where an enthusiast with a habit of 'observing' near airbases or known to listen in to defence-related radio messages might be warned off, with heavy-handed references to legal consequences, which they might interpret as a threat. But there can be no excuse for any direct threats to their relatives.)

How does Daniel Morris explain his silence- acquiescence- while working as part of some set-up threatening members of the American public who have done nothing more than report a UFO 'encounter'? -Not in itself illegal or even particularly frowned upon. Is there a law of misconduct in public office or something like that in the US?
"I was only following orders" is not a defence if the order is patently illegal.

Many people report seeing UFOs- and a small number recount seeing, even interacting with, extraterrestrials. Some of these accounts are very well-known. Why were those people not visited by Morris's colleagues?

Maybe the (claimed) rogue NRO outfit that Daniel Morris claims to have worked for had the means to distinguish between "real" UFO/ ET reports and others, and only worked to suppress the real reports. This would make sense from a HUMINT angle, leaving a large number of unprovable, inconsistent and sometimes conflicting accounts "out there" to mask the truth.

However, the logical upshot of this is that the vast majority of UFO accounts that we/ UFO enthusiasts are aware of must be false. Very few experiencers recount tales of being persuaded to change their stories, and when they don't, being threatened; by definition, none were silenced "...one way or another."
("Men in Black", arguably invented by Ufologist John Keel, have become something of a cultural trope.)
We won't know the accounts of those who were successfully persuaded by Morris, or successfully threatened, or otherwise silenced.

I'm not wholly convinced of the accuracy of Public's Daniel Morris story.
MiB were "invented" by UFO writer/prankster Gray Barker, although he initially called them "blackmen." Keel probably introduced the phenomena to the public at large, but it was Baker who came up with it.

External Quote:
In his article "Gray Barker: My Friend, the Myth-Maker," John C. Sherwood claims that, in the late 1960s, at age 18, he cooperated when Gray Barker urged him to develop a hoax—which Barker subsequently published—about what Barker called "blackmen", three mysterious UFO inhabitants who silenced Sherwood's pseudonymous identity, "Dr. Richard H Pratt.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_in_black

Here is the full "Skeptical Inquirer" Sherwood article referenced in the Wiki site above.

External Quote:
If Gray Barker was alive today, he'd think he'd died and gone to Heavan. Seems that now everyone has heard of "The Men in Black," a concept he first raised to prominence in UFO lore.
https://skepticalinquirer.org/1998/05/gray-barker-my-friend-the-myth-maker/


Barker donated his life's work to a WV library where the "Gray Barker Collection" is available to the public. I think going through his files would be a hoot.

External Quote:
The Collection consists of approximately 29 drawers of file folders, 300 books, 75 groups of magazines, photographs of Barker and various props used by Barker. It is located in historic Waldomore in the Gray Barker Room. The public is welcome to visit during our regular hours. If you cannot visit during these hours, feel free to contact David Houchin to set up an appointment.
https://www.clarksburglibrary.org/barker-
 
Isn't 2017 a bit recent for something to be set up for retrievals? Is there a recent case that we isn't known about in UFO circles? Does a new department need to be set up each time a UAP crashes?

Sorry for all the questions, but stories of a new department set up around the same time as the recent lobbying efforts just smacks of more of the same.

Re 2017, if true this was presumably some sort of consolidation. I keep seeing allegations online tying this program to Grusch based on his resume that was given to Congress, so maybe in that direction?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentient_(intelligence_analysis_system)
 
he "UFO timeline" was created by Shellenberger and his reporting team.

Not to get to off topic, but they are interrelated, I thought Shellenberger and/or his staff created the "UFO Timeline" as well. When I started the thread on the "Timeline", I had gotten the impression it was some sort of "official" briefing, possibly from the staff of one of the more UFO minded congresspersons. Then found that it had come from Public and therefore Shellenberger in some capacity.

Now in this new article, he claims a government source compiled it and Public published it:

External Quote:

And the document was missing historical information that appeared in the 117-page "UAP Timeline" document created by a former or existing US government intelligence officer that Public published last year.
I'll have to pick through it again and see if there's any clues as to who might have put it together. As noted in the thread on the "UFO Timeline", as we're now calling it, it was just a rambling collection of UFO reports and classic stories taken from web pages, dubious sources like Tim Good's Above Top Secret, and a number of 2nd hand reports about various UFOlogists from books by Vallee and others.

Regardless of who compiled it, Shellenberger seems to be involved in publishing it and then taking AARO to task for not dealing with it. Complaining that the official government program created to study UFO/UAPs didn't take his "UFO timeline" seriously is a bit disingenuous. It's crap, and anyone calling themselves a journalist would see that right away.

Given that Shellenberger has now complained that AARO didn't include "historical information" from his "UFO Timeline" I suspect it shows that the Timeline was 1 part a sort of paper Gish Gallop. The compliant now is that AARO didn't address what was in the 177 pages, but had they addressed some of it, the complaint would then be they didn't address ALL of it. The point is to argue each and every little detail, no matter how dubious the source, and when one is shown to be false or inconclusive, the creator of the timeline can say: Well ok but what about this? Then what about this? For page after page, claim after claim. Always looking for just one "Gotcha!" that will prove aliens, a government coverup and whatever else.

The other part of the "UFO Timeline" is as sum is greater than the parts argument for congresspeople. Bombard them and their staffers with pages of claims, no matter how weak or silly, and surly all of this must add up to something.

I'm not wholly convinced of the accuracy of Public's Daniel Morris story.

Indeed. It's why I mentioned that one. Again, when one goes to the article online it's a bit confusing as Mohar and Shellenberger appear in the header to the story as if they wrote it. But at the end it says it was a guest piece by Mohar. Regardless, Public published it as a story about government types (MiBs if you will) that were threatening UFO witnesses and Morris is presented as a government employee confirming this assertion.

Did Mohar, Shellenberger or anyone at Public look up some of Morris's other claims? If so, why not put them in the piece? If not, why? I found them fairly easily as Morris likes to tell his stories. In fact, the source given by Mohar/Shellenberger in the story is a statement by Morris for Steven Greer's Disclosure project.

Just for the record, Morris, a Master Sargent in the USAF claims to have "cosmic level" clearance "38 levels above the President" and that the National Reconnaissance Organization (NRO) was super-secret:

External Quote:
I had a clearance 38 levels above top secret, which is cosmic top-secret -it is the top of all of those clearances. It is for UFOs, and aliens, etc. No president has had that level, has ever been cleared for that level. Eisenhower was the closest. Well, there are several intelligence agencies- the Army had it, the Air Force had it, the Navy had it. And then there were several secret intelligence agencies. One that did not exist, it was so secret, was the NRO. You couldn't mention NRO. It is the National Reconnaissance Organization. If you're on that level, then there's an organization worldwide called ACIO, that's Alien Contact Intelligence Organization. If you pay your dues and you follow the rules, your government is allowed to benefit from that organization's information. Now some people call it the high frontier. The Navy Intelligence refer to themselves that way sometimes. And they all work together. Air Force intelligence, Naval intelligence, and the NRO were at one time all in a certain part of Langley Air Force Base in Virginia. And most of the satellite interpreters were there, most of the intelligence interpreters from the Air Force, the Army, the Navy were there, that's where they worked and interpreted.
And if Public was using testimony from Morris as evidence that the government was threating people for reporting UFOs and Morris insinuates people may have been delt with "one way or another", why not just include his statement the clearly explains it's the National Security Agency (NSA) where the 00 licensed to kill guys worked:

External Quote:

The National Security Agency- the killers work in that. They're the guys that, when it becomes necessary for a 'problem' to be removed, they're…if you watch James Bond, they're double-O agents, if you get my meaning. And Secretary of Defense Forestall was the first real powerful known person that was eliminated because he was going to release the information.
He even says a Secretary of Defense was "eliminated"! Why not use this in the story? Mohar and Shellenberger were using the same source for Morris's claims I'm using:

External Quote:

Testimony of Master Sergeant Dan Morris, USAF (Retired)/ NRO Operative

September 2000
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/disclosure/briefing/disclosure12.htm

It's as if they cherry picked Morris's statement to back up the claims of "threats" but ignored the more, sensational shall we say, aspects from the same statement.

I wonder what parts of the new whistleblower's claims are we hearing and not hearing?
 
Just for the record, Morris, a Master Sargent in the USAF claims to have "cosmic level" clearance "38 levels above the President"

Ah. Strangely, this additional information about Daniel Morris's security clearance doesn't give me confidence that his testimony is 100% reliable.

It's as if they cherry picked Morris's statement to back up the claims of "threats" but ignored the more, sensational shall we say, aspects from the same statement.
Yes. It's almost as if Mohar/ Shellenberger/ Public don't thoroughly check the plausibility of the claims that they promulgate, or forget to include evidence that might cause others to question the claimant's narrative.

I was wondering, "Perhaps I'm being uncharitable, perhaps Mr Morris meant he had a security clearance for a stellar navigation course and was on the 39th floor of a building when the President visited the ground floor."

But @NorCal Dave has provided us with Morris's own testimony,
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/disclosure/briefing/disclosure12.htm (please thank Dave if you find it useful or interesting), and it would seem that Daniel Morris makes a number of claims that he doesn't back up with evidence, that seem to be at variance with our understanding of recent history/ physics/ astronomy.

N.b., Morris claims to have worked for the National Reconnaissance Organization, not the National Reconnaissance Office that has existed since 1961, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_National_Reconnaissance_Office.

Just a few of Daniel Morris's disclosures:
External Quote:

If you're on that level, then there's an organization worldwide called ACIO, that's Alien Contact Intelligence Organization.
Regarding the death of sacked Secretary of State for Defense James Forrestal while a psychiatric in-patient,
External Quote:

...but he wasn't killed by being thrown out the window, but he never got up alive…
As Forrestal fell twelve floors (from the 16th to a 3rd floor roof) it must be unlikely that he would have "got up" afterwards; there is absolutely no evidence of foul play (Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Forrestal).

External Quote:

Do you know why we stopped exploding nuclear weapons? We were ordered to do it by those ETs from Orion.
(1) Orion is a constellation, not a place. (2) "Those ETs" clearly favour Pakistan, India and North Korea, who all detonated nuclear weapons post- the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1996.

External Quote:
Germany recovered two UFOs before. It was 1931, '32, and they took them to Germany and started, like we do now, re-engineering. They got ahead, and even before the war started, they had a workable UFO…
Presumably not used during the war out of considerations for fairness.

External Quote:
Even back in Tesla's time, we had free energy that we could transfer. All you had to do was just put up an antennae and put a stake in the ground and you could light this house and have all the energy you needed.
(1) Tesla conspicuously failed in his ground-conducted electricity experiments for well-understood reasons,
(2) There is no evidence that Morris tried this to light his house. He explained how it worked:

External Quote:
What moves are electrons, in the gravity field, in the electronic field, and they turn in opposite directions, okay?
...but maybe he hasn't recounted or remembered all the details.

External Quote:
You know the South African Government admits that they retrieved an ET craft.
-Must admit I didn't know that. Although we might be slightly sceptical of some sources in the Apartheid regime.

External Quote:
And the Russians would send their badgers and their beavers out, they'd send their MIGs out...
"Badger" is the NATO name for the Tupolev Tu-16, which has bomber, missile carrier, recce/ int. and maritime patrol variants,
not aware of a NATO codename "Beaver" for a Soviet or Chinese bomber design.

Lots more; radar caused 2 saucers to collide and crash at Roswell, 1947; one UFOnaut survived but eventually died;
External Quote:
...they came and got his body, and that's when they went to Washington and had that formation over Washington. So they retrieved his body
...a UFO was shot down in 1968 or '69 at White Sands, etc. etc.

Daniel Morris's claims are startling, but unfortunately he hasn't given us a compelling reason to take them as literally true.

It might be seen as somewhat curious that Mohar and/ or Shellenberger think Mr Morris's many extraordinary claims add to our knowledge of UAP (or recent politics. Or physics. Or extraterrestrial life).
 
Last edited:
External Quote:
Germany recovered two UFOs before. It was 1931, '32, and they took them to Germany and started, like we do now, re-engineering. They got ahead, and even before the war started, they had a workable UFO…
Presumably not used during the war out of considerations for fairness.
That's what the V1 was. It could fly somewhere and then crash, like most UFOs. :p
External Quote:
Even back in Tesla's time, we had free energy that we could transfer. All you had to do was just put up an antennae and put a stake in the ground and you could light this house and have all the energy you needed.
(1) Tesla conspicuously failed in his ground-conducted electricity experiments for well-understood reasons,
Oh, but this works, but it requires a radio tower nearby. Done in Hamburg/Germany in the early days of radio until the station got wise. There was a cluster of small gardens near the transmitter that had no power otherwise, and the hobby gardeners operated lightbulbs in pretty much the manner described. (Obviously this energy was only "free" in the sense that someone else paid for it.)
 
External Quote:

Do you know why we stopped exploding nuclear weapons? We were ordered to do it by those ETs from Orion.
(1) Orion is a constellation, not a place.
This mistake always makes me laugh, or facepalm. The furthest bits of Orion are *50* times further away than the nearest bits. So we're 50x closer to some bits of Orion than some other bits of Orion are. So maybe we're actually *in* Orion, we just don't have the right view of the scene.
 
A few observations on some of the above points:

"Cosmic" isn't a security clearance that's 'above' POTUS (as Dan Morris apparently claims). Cosmic is the internal designation used by NATO for their Top Secret documents. CTS = Cosmic Top Secret.

Re: the formation of a supposedly "new" Recovery Program in 2017
When Shellenberger's story about "Immaculate Constellation" first broke, I took the report to mean that it was merely a renaming of previously-run programs so as to avoid close scrutiny in the wake of Grusch's Congressional testimony, and to possibly hide a paper trail. Whether any of that is true or not, I dunno.

The oft-repeated notion that Aliens disapproved of our nuclear testing, and therefore intervened, never seems to account for this:
 

Attachments

  • Nuclear test data.png
    Nuclear test data.png
    142.8 KB · Views: 12
Another thing that's funny about all these alleged "whistle-blowers" and their access to Super-Duper-Above-Top-Secret information is that none of them (to my knowledge) have ever revealed the true nature of MIL/INTEL classification according to those were legitimate intel insiders, such as Daniel Ellsberg. Ellsberg provided a very comprehensive overview of his experiences with the various levels of secrecy within the Intel community—how they're parsed out, how one gains access (or doesn't), how many levels are "hidden" from others, and how the system quite effectively keeps many, many secrets from ever seeing the light of day. He devotes a few pages in his book The Doomsday Machine to this very topic, but I've yet to find any excerpts online that I could copy/paste and share.

Suffice to say, for now, that none of the better-known pretenders of the past several years have even come close to describing, or claiming access to, the systems and methods described by Ellsberg. I've always found that to be highly suspect. Ellsberg was the very definition of "whistle-blower", and, due to his assignments, was privy to things that most were not.

His role was somewhat similar to what we're told was the role of Sean Kirkpatrick (but without the UAP/NHI angle). Ellsberg was granted far-reaching access in order to evaluate the preparedness of the U.S. in case of a nuclear conflict. This meant digging into all levels in the chain of command, from Intel planners to the pilots and navy commanders themselves, around the world, who would execute such orders should they be given. It also included an assessment of our enemies capabilities, which, of course, could only be derived from having access to our own highly-guarded counterintelligence. In order to fully understand such a crucial issue in all its fine details, Ellsberg was given unhindered access to all those details. The Pentagon Papers, and what they ultimately revealed about the gross mismanagement (to say the very least) of the Viet Nam war, actually paled in comparison to much more grave and dire revelations that Ellsberg uncovered about our plans for a global nuclear conflict. But that's another story entirely.

My point is: Daniel Ellsberg was the real deal. Yet none of the talking heads of today's clownish cloak-and-dagger world of UAP/NHI have ever provided anything even close to the verifiable authenticity of Ellsberg's work. In fact, they don't even present a coherent perspective on how the inner-circles of their own agencies even operate. But I hear big things are "coming soon." :rolleyes:
 
@Mendel
"That's what the V1 was. It could fly somewhere and then crash, like most UFOs."

I think it was the V2 of which it was said it would land anywhere in a complete circle the height of the rocket, depending on which direction it managed to fall. One was launched at White Sands and went south instead of north. It landed near Juarez, and the story is told that the residents would scavenge the dumps for any bits of metal or machinery to sell as "genuine rocket parts".
 
Another thing I saw mentioned was that Jeremy Corbell and Danny Sheehan are saying this is legitimate, this implies that they already knew of it. Does this imply they are sitting on "nuggets" to drip feed to the public?

Or possibly Shellenberger is running in the same crowds and hearing from the same sources. Most of Corbell and Sheehan's claims have yet to pan out. I still think ARRO was on to something claiming this is all a game of telephone between a select, though influential, group of believers. I think they also recycle, reuse and re-purpose a lot of the same bits of information.

Schellenberger, in the Shermer interview at least from last year, seems to be more about government coverups and lying. Something that has happened before and he thinks is happening still. UFOs just happen to be what the coverup and lying is about.

https://youtu.be/tPHETzCHtCg
 
This mistake always makes me laugh, or facepalm. The furthest bits of Orion are *50* times further away than the nearest bits. So we're 50x closer to some bits of Orion than some other bits of Orion are. So maybe we're actually *in* Orion, we just don't have the right view of the scene.
That was the funniest part of the original Stargate movie, where Daniel Jackson interprets the constellations as points in space as such where combinations of them define another point in space as the stargate's destination. Using the symbols of constellations as seen from Earth as the code for an alien society's galactic transportation system winds up getting completely glossed over in the TV shows that followed, probably wisely.
 
Daniel Jackson interprets the constellations as points in space as such where combinations of them define another point in space as the stargate's destination
To be fair, he only concludes that the constellations represent the reference points. If you were using, oh, pulsars as your reference points and needed to graphically represent your list of pulsars, using the iconography of their host constellations would work. Like throwing up a drawing of Vulpecula's asterism to represent PSR B1919+21.

Anyhow. I remember seeing this 38 levels of Ultra Extreme Super Duper Maxi-Super Secret Clearance before and just want to get my head into that level of "why." What's in those 37 layers between "Cosmic (ha)" and "Yankee White?"
 
Not to get to off topic, but they are interrelated, I thought Shellenberger and/or his staff created the "UFO Timeline" as well. When I started the thread on the "Timeline", I had gotten the impression it was some sort of "official" briefing, possibly from the staff of one of the more UFO minded congresspersons. Then found that it had come from Public and therefore Shellenberger in some capacity.

Now in this new article, he claims a government source compiled it and Public published it:

External Quote:

And the document was missing historical information that appeared in the 117-page "UAP Timeline" document created by a former or existing US government intelligence officer that Public published last year.
I'll have to pick through it again and see if there's any clues as to who might have put it together. As noted in the thread on the "UFO Timeline", as we're now calling it, it was just a rambling collection of UFO reports and classic stories taken from web pages, dubious sources like Tim Good's Above Top Secret, and a number of 2nd hand reports about various UFOlogists from books by Vallee and others.

Regardless of who compiled it, Shellenberger seems to be involved in publishing it and then taking AARO to task for not dealing with it. Complaining that the official government program created to study UFO/UAPs didn't take his "UFO timeline" seriously is a bit disingenuous. It's crap, and anyone calling themselves a journalist would see that right away.
So, I'd note as an aside (though trying to keep it relevant here) that this is something Shellenberger actually does quite a bit. I'm not sure if you've noticed but as an example, if you pay attention to how he advertises Publics reporting - not always but there is a lot of cases where he will take Public reporting then advertise it as if he is disconnected from it.
Further, spawning from that, we see tiny developments that happen from him on certain reporting in this presented layer that develop distinctly different from what the reporting says. For example, in this case, we have WE compiled the timeline (original article) > IT was compiled by insinuated unidentified person (after original article posting) > developed now into, not only was it an unidentified person, it was this secret source they have.

There's another area Shellenberger has done this heavily and it's his coverage of the counter-influence industry. He is linked with that group of far right congressmen using Congress as an outlet to falsely claim that the MDM industry is out working with the CIA and etc to censor Americans and weaponize twitter and whatever.
Anyways without drawing too far into the background of that - we equally see that here. Shellenberger will release content they get through Public, which is advertised, including by Shellenberger, in a way that makes it seem as if first hand sources gave them this content. In that case, it is then filtered to Congress, where their own made-up content they use and frame it as "everyone is doing/talking about X", when in reality it is literally their content. The term "Disinformation Industrial Complex" followed this path, Shellenberger and co made it up themselves and used their reporting to filter the term into congressional documentation as "the public is talking about this issue and this is what they call it!".
Getting into the weeds there would require a larger post - to try and keep it more relevant though I'll get an assessment written up on Shellenberger as a source and it'll include the sourced elements of that for detailing it. Should have it done sometime over the next 48.
 
when in reality it is literally their content.

Got it. It's very similar to what we saw with the KONA BLUE project. It appears there was some sort of proposal for the project at DHS, as a likely spinoff of AWWSAP, but without the UFO/Skinwlaker Ranch stuff. Then some more UFO minded people managed to get some UFO/SWR language added to the proposed project. Then they turned around and claimed there was a secret government UFO project called KONA BLUE,which was something of their own making.

Discussed here:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/kona-blue-aaro-report-on-the-proposed-aawsap-successor.13434/

It still seems to be a relatively small group that just hype these stories up amongst themselves and then become a revolving door of secret sources. Sometimes they bring in a new face, like Grusch and Elizondo before him, but in the background is Hal Puthoff, Jaques Vallee, Chris Mellon. Robert Bigelow and others that have been at this for decades.

I'm doing some name searches on the Shellenberger, or his former or current intelligence person compiled "UFO Timeline". Anything interesting I'll post on that thread:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-congressional-uap-hearings-debrief.13077/
 
Can anyone validate this? Absolutely fascinating if it proves to hold water.
I don't find people not understanding percentages fascinating.

Clicking the (?) after "Interest over time" brings up this explanation:
SmartSelect_20241012-102019_Samsung Internet.jpg

"Interest over time" is a percentage scaled by the highest number.
For example, if in the morning we had 350 April hits and 1000 hits now, and then the conspiracy theory blows up to 350 April hits and 100,000 hits now, then the 100% line changes from 1000 to 100,000, and 350 changes from 35% to 0.35%.

Then if you limit the search to some location where there hasn't been a lot of search interest this week, then 4 searches today and 6 searches back in April put that week at 100% and today at 66%.

tl:dr: The Google data is intact. The graph changes scale because it updates in real time.


Source links:
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today 5-y&geo=US&q=Immaculate constellation&hl=en
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today 5-y&geo=US-WV-511&q=Immaculate constellation&hl=en
 
Last edited:
What are the units on the vertical axis? If we don't know what the graph is telling us, it's going to be impossible to interpret it accurately.
https://support.google.com/trends/answer/4365533?hl=en

External Quote:

How is Google Trends data normalized?

Google Trends normalizes search data to make comparisons between terms easier. Search results are normalized to the time and location of a query by the following process:
  • Each data point is divided by the total searches of the geography and time range it represents to compare relative popularity. Otherwise, places with the most search volume would always be ranked highest.
  • The resulting numbers are then scaled on a range of 0 to 100 based on a topic's proportion to all searches on all topics.
  • Different regions that show the same search interest for a term don't always have the same total search volumes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top