November 13 2024 Congress hearings

[jackfrostvc]

The problem I have with that 11 page document that was released by Shellingberger is this:

Without knowing who wrote it. how do we know it wasn't one or more of the usual suspects.

 

[Jack Mallory]

Without knowing who wrote it. how do we know it wasn't one or more of the usual suspects.

It seems highly likely that it is just that. As others have pointed out in the Immaculate Constellation thread (or as Boebert repeatedly referred to it as: "Immaculent Constellation") it could very well be the product of Elizondo himself, Jay Stratton or a combination of the two. But if it you read it with the sound of Elizondo's voice in your head, it's really not too difficult to imagine it coming straight from him. Which would really be the funniest thing ever.

The oddly-specific compliments paid to Elizondo towards the end of the document are totally bizarre, and seem entirely unnecessary as they do nothing whatsoever to verify the veracity of the report itself. Very strange (but this would be better pursued in the designated Immaculate Constellation thread).

 

[MonkeeSage]

Rep. Burchett entered a document into the hearing record. The first page repeats a conspiracy theory about the CIA blocking transfer of UAP materials from Lockheed Martin to AAWSAP, followed by several old memos from the 1950's that appear (to me at least) to be unrelated.

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO12/20241113/117721/HHRG-118-GO12-20241113-SD004.pdf

p. 1 (markings in original)

The AARO historical report directly addresses this conspiracy claim, with the accused CIA official signing a memorandum for record that he has no knowledge of the alleged claims.

https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PD...t_Vol_1_2024.pdf?ver=WwWcCg5XNKBtz9PnBXMI8A==

pp. 28-29

p. 31

 

[FatPhil]

The problem I have with that 11 page document that was released by Shellingberger is this:

Without knowing who wrote it. how do we know it wasn't one or more of the usual suspects.

Shellenberger's fully capable of writing nonsense that he thinks is based on facts but contains so much illogic and misunderstanding it ends up being nonsense all by himself. The fact that he's now tag-teaming with the usual suspects probably makes him one of the usual suspects.

I think this was where he changed from "he writes interesting stuff" to "he writes potentially harmful stuff" for me:

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All
...
In his book, Shellenberger argues that people shouldn't need to be worried about climate change causing crop failure, famine and consequent mass deaths because he believes that when it comes to food production, humans will be able to produce more food despite the effects of climate change. Shellenberger cites an editorial that is published by a group led by Eric Holt-Giménez to support his statement, however Holt-Giménez later told Snopes that Shellenberger "has either misunderstood our editorial, or is purposefully mischaracterizing our points." Instead Holt-Giménez criticized the industrial farming that Shellenberger advocates, and says that such practices are using a model of overproduction that generates poverty. He explained that people typically don't become hungry because there is not enough food, but that instead they become hungry when they are too poor to afford to buy the food that is produced.

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha...ever:_Why_Environmental_Alarmism_Hurts_Us_All

I was aware of him for probably a decade before that as he had a clear, and fairly unfashionable, pro-nuclear stance. The above persists agressively with that view, but has twisted it from a bland "nuclear will help us solve our problems" to something more like "nuclear is the solution to all our problems".

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

Shellenberger reiterated the claim today that the timeline was created by some spooky source. I note again as I covered here previously, this is a hard incongruity. He either lied to Congress or lied to the public in his initial reporting (which is the entire reason he's even there or known about). His original claim, and still within the original article, claims that the authors themselves compiled the timeline for release through Public. I noted how Shellenberger has slowly adjusted this claim over time, and this time includes new inserts - claiming it was a publicly approved breakoff of a timeline created as part of govt work and that a restricted version also exists. Not worth covering all the claims but the timeline is also chalk full of falsities.

A second note I'll make is related to the recent liberation times reporting and the guys now taking up the claim about the LH-CIA-AAWSAP materials. This claim was first made by LiberationTimes the other week, and only now are the guys that were even supposedly involved talking about it. LiberationTimes learned this from unnamed sources. Further, specifically as per the full claim - the materials were owned by the CIA but on loan to Lockheed Martin. The LH executive referenced, without the approval of CIA, made a plan to move this material over to Bigelow and give it to AAWSAP, without CIAs authorization or even knowledge. This is literally theft, they most literally claimed they tried to steal CIA property and also abuse SAP reporting mechanisms to hide it from the CIA.

 

[MonkeeSage]

The AARO historical report directly addresses this conspiracy claim, with the accused CIA official signing a memorandum for record that he has no knowledge of the alleged claims.

It's really a he said he said I guess. Just to be clear I have no solid reason to believe the CIA guy over the other witnesses, but I am going to favor known explanations over unknown extraordinary ones. Not sure that applies here, they are equally kinda plausible. Maybe it gets into more what else would have to be true for it to be true to take either interpretation.

 

[Mendel]

It's really a he said he said I guess. Just to be clear I have no solid reason to believe the CIA guy over the other witnesses, but I am going to favor known explanations over unknown extraordinary ones. Not sure that applies here, they are equally kinda plausible. Maybe it gets into more what else would have to be true for it to be true to take either interpretation.

Is the claim even explicitly in "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon"? @NorCal Dave (p.152-153)

If it is, then you have names supporting it; otherwise, it's a rumor, vs. AARO, a paper trail, and a signed statement.

And obviously the material isn't there. Unless they were referring to Art's Parts, which TTSA bought and had the army analyse, to find out it's not magical at all, and there's no indication it originated off-world.

 

[Jack Mallory]

Wait, this is real?


Source: https://x.com/NancyMace/status/1856804644275589603

 

[Jack Mallory]

Meanwhile, Boebert actually asked the four "witnesses" about rumored genetic manipulation and the possible creation of human/alien hybrids. All four claimed no knowledge of such a program.

As I was saying...

Source: https://x.com/UAPorSAP/status/1856834494424387800

 

[Alytha]

Here's Jason Colavito's summary:
https://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/...red-ufo-advocates-saying-nothing-of-substance

The hearing had no dramatic revelations and no disclosure of aliens, but it did feature people claiming not to have firsthand knowledge, lots of secondhand stories, and dissembling about being unable to speak publicly about secret things. A new "whistleblower" document about the so-called Immaculate Constellation program was revealed, but it was even less impressive than David Grusch's testimony last year.

 

[FatPhil]

Nearly an hour in already, eight opening statements made. Did "Disclosure" happen yet?

Only 3 minutes in, and I've already seen the chair proudly affirm that she's not disinterested in the subject matter, in fact she's propagating the soon-to-be-repeated narrative of the not-actual-witnesses "witnesses".

I bet this panel is going to conclude that the UAPs are lighter than ducks, and therefore are witches, do I really need to continue?

 

[JMartJr]

I bet this panel is going to conclude that the UAPs are lighter than ducks, and therefore are witches, do I really need to continue?

Or that they will not conclude anything at all, but "the issue is so important that what we need to do is, we need to have more hearings!"

Sometimes the purpose of a hearing is not to learn anything, but merely to be seen having a hearing. That is, to be seen at all.
.....
On another topic, the current advocates of "disclosure" have now had a second Congressional hearing in which they did not disclose anything. Assuming there was anything to disclose, it seems to me that THEY are the ones who are holding information back from the citizens of the US and the world.

Hey, Big UFO, you claim to have all this evidence -- disclose it! Put your cards on the table.

Hey Congressional Saucer Caucus, you claim that you want disclosure -- why have you called witnesses who will have "disclosed" to your staff during preparations for hearings that they don't actually KNOW anything, why not call those who supposedly DO? If you have additional hearings, why not call some witnesses who have witnessed something, who have evidence and can present it?

Or are there no such witnesses, and are the UFOlogists' cards all just blank?

 

[FatPhil]

As I was saying...

Source: https://x.com/UAPorSAP/status/1856834494424387800

Her first question's a bit mangled, one too many restrictive clauses that could support an argument that various kinds of hypothetical dodgy programs would not be included in what she's asking for, but she does seem to be asking about programs that the four witlesses have asserted to exist, and therefore the "I don't know"s do reinforce the conclusions we've drawn historically (that they've got nothing).

Is there a transcript of the hearing? I'm too lazy to do manual transcription of the interesting bits presently.

 

[Jack Mallory]

Is there a transcript of the hearing? I'm too lazy to do manual transcription of the interesting bits presently.

It typically take them a few weeks before the transcripts are published on the official Congressional website, but it should be there in time. The most recent transcript is only from Oct. 25th.

https://www.congress.gov/house-hearing-transcripts/118th-congress

 

[Mendel]

Is there a transcript of the hearing? I'm too lazy to do manual transcription of the interesting bits presently

You can get auto-generated subtitles off youtube via https://downsub.com/?url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT2iWKZr0qA
You need to watch what you click (some "download" links may be dodgy ads), find this

and you should get a text file. Don't install anything.

If you're planning to post from that, please take the time to reformat for readability, i.e. remove line breaks and unneeded time stamps. A time stamp at the beginning and then every few minutes is sufficient.

I usually also proofread my excerpts, or wait for the official transcript.

P.S. Maybe your own youtube download tool can get you the subtitles directly?

 

[Eburacum]

but she does seem to be asking about programs that the four witlesses have asserted to exist,

Cruel, but fair.

 

[Eburacum]

Having said that, Michael Gold doesn't seem to have asserted anything, unless I've missed it.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Shellenberger reiterated the claim today that the timeline was created by some spooky source.

Whoever made it should be ashamed. It's bad.

Is the claim even explicitly in "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon"? @NorCal Dave (p.152-153)

I'm on my crappy PC right now. The book is on my Mac, so I'll go take a look as soon as I can. I remember them going to DHS, but more as a new place to house AAWSAP. Puthoff was heavily involved in all of this and heavily into meta-materials form crashed saucers, so it sounds reasonable.

 

[skb8721]

A question: Is there any evidence that Mr. Elizondo is who he says he is?

That is, is there evidence he actually worked in military intelligence and (as the media says) ran a UAP project at the Pentagon?

Moreover, do we know if Mr. Elizondo has formal training in any sort of scientific or instigative field, or in any field that might have proved useful to the military's study of UAPs?

In short, how do we know he wasn't merely a low-level filing clerk in the Pentagon, if even that? I do not question his reputation or truthfulness -- I merely ask, "how do we know?" (Surely we must have more than merely his word for it?)

 

[Harabeck]

https://www.npr.org/2024/11/13/nx-s1-5189426/ufo-uap-hearing-congress-2024

"Are you read into secret UAP crash retrieval programs?" Mace later asked.


"We would have to have a conversation in a closed session, ma'am," Elizondo said. "I signed documentation three years ago that restricts my ability to discuss specifically crash retrievals."

Why would Elizondo have signed new NDA's 3 years ago when he resigned as an official in 2017?

 

[Jack Mallory]

Having said that, Michael Gold doesn't seem to have asserted anything, unless I've missed it.

His testimony was, by far, the most forgettable. Literally.

Meanwhile, Jesse Michaels is praising Shellenberger for his "courage" and for "testifying under oath on the existence of unacknowledged UAP detection." But what weight does such an oath carry when he's only providing (at best) supposed secondhand testimony from an anonymous source? What is he "swearing" to in the swearing-in process? That he really spoke to a source and that this source really provided him with that farcical report on Immaculate Constellation? I just don't see how taking an oath corroborates or validates any of the contents of said report. Or how it validates anything, for that matter.

 

[JMartJr]

Why would Elizondo have signed new NDA's 3 years ago when he resigned as an official in 2017?

Possibly with his publisher... either promising that anything he discloses will be through the book(s) or agreeing not to disclose that he does not in fact know anything about certain topics as that would reduce his value as an author for them?

 

[NorCal Dave]

Is the claim even explicitly in "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon"? @NorCal Dave (p.152-153)

I'm not finding it, at least not the way it's described. I have the Kindle version, so sometimes the page numbers get a bit off, but searching for Tera O'Toole, who supposedly was setting up the transfer, only comes up in the book in relation to the BAASS guys trying get their "high-tech" stuff from Skinwalker Ranch into DHS:

Bell had set up the meeting to brief Secretary O'Toole on the top level BAASS program mission goals. Lacatski, Kelleher, Puthoff, and Black were there to answer any technical questions before exploring any areas of commonality that might lead to a BAASS-like program under the auspices of the Science and Technology umbrella at DHS. Specifically, the briefing would focus on the commonality of sensor technology applied to both a BAASS-like program and a collaborative Science & Technology program under the roof of the DHS.

Kelleher, Colm A.. Skinwalkers at the Pentagon: An Insiders' Account of the Secret Government UFO Program (p. 149). RTMA, LLC. Kindle Edition.

Her name appears 12 times between pages 148 and 153, but all in reference to this meeting. There is a vague reference to meta-materials held by aerospace contractors. Supposedly Mover and Bell from DHS, pulled an AATIP and went looking for UAP related stuff. In classic conspiratorial logic, being told "NO" meant "YES" there was advanced tech being hidden from them that they apparently had a right to know about:

Shortly after the successful meeting with O'Toole at DHS, Sacha Mover and Jim Bell began knocking on doors beyond DHS to connect with the "keepers of the secrets" in at least two other agencies. In these meetings, which took place in June-July 2011, Sacha, Jim, and colleagues were treated rudely and harshly. Bell and Mover were repeatedly told "no, and hell no." This left Mover and Bell convinced that advanced technology was sequestered under government supervision at aerospace contractors' facilities. As a result, the DHS officials became very hesitant and even fearful of moving forward. Perhaps Mover and Bell only belatedly realized the unique, game changing, and earth-shattering nature of the biggest secret ever kept by the United States.

Kelleher, Colm A.. Skinwalkers at the Pentagon: An Insiders' Account of the Secret Government UFO Program (p. 152). RTMA, LLC. Kindle Edition.

Lockheed-Martin only appears in the Appendix as source.

EDIT: I'll have to look into the Liberation Times article time permitting.

 

[Mendel]

Why would Elizondo have signed new NDA's 3 years ago when he resigned as an official in 2017?

Everybody needs a hobby. Maybe Elizondo's is signing NDAs?

 

[Jack Mallory]

Everybody needs a hobby. Maybe Elizondo's is signing NDAs?

Doesn't Lue still claim to do occasional consulting work for the IC? I imagine that would be his excuse/reasoning.

 

[Mendel]

I'm not finding it, at least not the way it's described.

Thank you!

@MonkeeSage, there goes your "equally plausible". On one hand, there's an actual witness, an interview, an AARO case file, and a signed statement; on the other hand, there's an anonymous rumor from the "trust me, bro" faction that has always failed to deliver evidence for its claims.

 

[Mick West]

Here's an AI transcript, useful for finding things, but not guaranteed to be 100% accurate
https://otter.ai/u/OsSQagI3jaCdFHz7mdrOFyAjXWQ?utm_source=copy_url

Text attached.

 

[Ravi]

The specific quote:

Unknown Speaker 49:15
you read into secret UAP crash retrieval programs?

Lue Elizondo 49:19
We would have to have a conversation in a closed session. Ma'am, I signed documentation three years ago that restricts my ability to discuss specifically crash retrievals. I submitted from my book through the DOPSR process, which took a year to be reviewed. And what is in the book is what I was told I'm allowed to talk about.

 

[NorCal Dave]

The specific quote:

Unknown Speaker 49:15
you read into secret UAP crash retrieval programs?

Lue Elizondo 49:19
We would have to have a conversation in a closed session. Ma'am, I signed documentation three years ago that restricts my ability to discuss specifically crash retrievals. I submitted from my book through the DOPSR process, which took a year to be reviewed. And what is in the book is what I was told I'm allowed to talk about.

So, if everything he can talk about is in his book (available at Amazon, Barns & Nobel, WalMart and other fine retailers in case anyone wants to know what it is Lue can talk about), what's the point of having him testify? What a dog & pony show.

At first, I was a little surprised that he was one of the witnesses given the recent "ceiling lamp as UFO" gaff, but I assume this was all arranged a while ago. Still, I figured his light was beginning to dim a bit.

As it turns out, the big bombshell was presented, not by Elizondo or any other actual government official, rather Shellenberger, a quasi-journalist wowed the hearings with a "report" giving to him by Jeremy Corbel, proponent of Bob Lazar's wild ass claims and acolyte of Lazar's original mark PR guy, George Knapp. Said "report" is from an anonymous somebody that supposedly stumbled across this super-duper secret uSAP program and its findings. Despite it being super-duper secret.

And our heroic anonymous somebody has to stay hidden or the MiBs will kill him. What a farce. It's sounding like a bad episode of The X Files.

 

[MonkeeSage]

A question: Is there any evidence that Mr. Elizondo is who he says he is?

That is, is there evidence he actually worked in military intelligence and (as the media says) ran a UAP project at the Pentagon?

Moreover, do we know if Mr. Elizondo has formal training in any sort of scientific or instigative field, or in any field that might have proved useful to the military's study of UAPs?

In short, how do we know he wasn't merely a low-level filing clerk in the Pentagon, if even that? I do not question his reputation or truthfulness -- I merely ask, "how do we know?" (Surely we must have more than merely his word for it?)

Mr. Elizondo's background and claims have been discussed in a few threads. I'm not sure if there's a deep dive thread specifically on his background and credentials. I didn't find one in a quick search but if there is one maybe someone else can link it.

Here are a few threads:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/th...ing-claims-by-elizondo-ttsa-and-others.12292/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/luis-elizondos-claims-of-coming-ufo-disclosure.13238/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/errors-in-luis-elizondos-ufo-book-imminent.13613/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pe...-government-drive-spending.13338/#post-310444

Mick also interviewed him a few years ago:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/my-chat-with-luis-elizondo.11660/

There is an almost 3 hour documentary created by Area 503 on youtube on 2022 that is in my opinion very well researched and documented that goes deep into his history and claims about his role in government and UAP programs.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVpcy5t3EWw

My belief is that Mr. Elizondo did work for OUSDI, was associated with the AAWSAP program by proximity and being friends with James Lacatski and Jay Stratton, but never had any officially assigned duties with the program, and then when DIA dropped the program, he and Stratton LARPed as secret UAP researchers on their own time with their own made up "AATIP" program that was never sanctioned or funded by the government.

 

[Mendel]

A question: Is there any evidence that Mr. Elizondo is who he says he is?

That is, is there evidence he actually worked in military intelligence and (as the media says) ran a UAP project at the Pentagon?

Senator Harry Reid signed a letter that said so.
I am convinced (and Elizondo's book confirms it) that his UFO project (AATIP 2012-2017) was an unofficial, unfunded effort that he kept secret even from his immediate superior, although the project was never classified. (The official predecessor project AAWSAP (2009-2011) applied to be classified under the moniker AATIP and failed.)

We know Elizondo did work at the Pentagon, and he did give 3 Navy videos to the New York Times in December 2017, after he had them cleared for TTSA use.

Moreover, do we know if Mr. Elizondo has formal training in any sort of scientific or instigative field, or in any field that might have proved useful to the military's study of UAPs?

UFOlogy is rife with people who do have the training, but lack the skeptical approach to apply it. For example, take Avi Loeb, who is convinced that the small metal balls he dredged up from the ocean floor must stem from an interstellar meteor that he proposes came down in the vicinity—a position much doubted by geologists more familiar with the seabed.

In short, how do we know he wasn't merely a low-level filing clerk in the Pentagon, if even that? I do not question his reputation or truthfulness -- I merely ask, "how do we know?" (Surely we must have more than merely his word for it?)

It's classified.

If you want to deep dive into the details, start reading at https://www.metabunk.org/threads/preview-of-luis-elizondos-ufo-book-imminent.13571/post-322391 and continue from there.

 

[Ben Harris]

So, if everything he can talk about is in his book (available at Amazon, Barns & Nobel, WalMart and other fine retailers in case anyone wants to know what it is Lue can talk about), what's the point of having him testify? What a dog & pony show.

At first, I was a little surprised that he was one of the witnesses given the recent "ceiling lamp as UFO" gaff, but I assume this was all arranged a while ago. Still, I figured his light was beginning to dim a bit.

As it turns out, the big bombshell was presented, not by Elizondo or any other actual government official, rather Shellenberger, a quasi-journalist wowed the hearings with a "report" giving to him by Jeremy Corbel, proponent of Bob Lazar's wild ass claims and acolyte of Lazar's original mark PR guy, George Knapp. Said "report" is from an anonymous somebody that supposedly stumbled across this super-duper secret uSAP program and its findings. Despite it being super-duper secret.

And our heroic anonymous somebody has to stay hidden or the MiBs will kill him. What a farce. It's sounding like a bad episode of The X Files.

Yep. It's a flying circus! The face of ufology is a joke. This is not how genuine people act.

 

[Jack Mallory]

This is reasonably entertaining.


Source: https://x.com/ddeanjohnson/status/1857171782689530049/photo/1

 

[Mendel]

Yep. It's a flying circus! The face of ufology is a joke. This is not how genuine people act.

Are you saying they're lizard people?

 

[Mendel]

This is reasonably entertaining.

Kirkpatrick's Latin feels ungrammatical, but Google Translate doesn't mind.

universum mutatio est. vita nostra est quod cogitationes nostra facere est.
the universe is changing. Our life is what our thoughts make it.

 

[Jack Mallory]

A question: Is there any evidence that Mr. Elizondo is who he says he is?

There was a fairly comprehensive breakdown of Lue's documented military career on Twitter by @OSIRISUAP.
It's after midnight for me and I need to get to bed but I'll see if can't track down the specifics tomorrow.

Edit: Oh, I see he's member here as well. Maybe he can chime in directly then.

 

[john.phil]

This is reasonably entertaining.

I have extracted the text from the image you published, to make it searchable and to highlight some of the key parts:

Re: IMMACULATE CONSTELLATION "public version"
Sean Kirkpatrick
To: "Douglas D. Johnson"

Not much new in the way of accusations. None the alleged records were presented, and it sounds a lot like they are mistaking pilot reporting (PIREPS) for HUMINT.

As for having it reviewed for public release by State Department, that should be a major red flag. Anything submitted to an organization for public release has a stamp on it. This one doesn't, for one. Secondly if anything, State Department does not review for Public Release other department's information. That's just made up.

The transcripts of DoD leadership to Congress is particularly entertaining. If such things existed in the way he describes, he certainly wouldn't have access to them through his lawful duties. The only transcripts we had were public record transcripts from hearings.

Unfortunately, a number of people upload social media video to our classified systems to talk about. There's a UAP enthusiasts group on the classified system. It would not surprise me if he was referring to that. Anything valid and real would be in AARO's database, which may also be what he's referring to.

Sean

Universum mutatio est. Vita nostra est quod cogitationes nostra facere est.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Nov 13, 2024, at 6:43 PM, Douglas D. Johnson

FYI-- the attached document was entered into the hearing record by Rep. Nancy Mace, during today's hearing (shortly after the panel members received it from Michael Shellenberger).

Note the curious claim, in the first paragraph, "This public version of the author's report was reviewed and approved for public release by the Department of State, Bureau of Global Public Affairs." How does that work?

If you choose to make any comments after reviewing this document, I'll regard them as on-the-record. The document is currently posted on at least two congressional sites:

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/GO/GO12/20241113/117721/HHRG-118-GO12-20241113-SD003.pdf
https://mace.house.gov/immaculateconstellation

 

[FatPhil]

Cruel, but fair.

Thank you. Or, should I say, my g/f thanks you, because it was she who came up with it.

 

[FatPhil]

Kirkpatrick's Latin feels ungrammatical, but Google Translate doesn't mind.

universum mutatio est. vita nostra est quod cogitationes nostra facere est.
the universe is changing. Our life is what our thoughts make it.

It's bullshit latin, clearly a machine translation made by a broken Magimix, but that's close enough for government work:

img: https://www.aaro.mil/portals/136/Images/AARO Sketch 2.7b Dark Mode.png

This loud and unqualified debunker did Latin for 3 years at school, and enjoyed every minute of it. And fully understands the concept of bullshit.

 

[NorCal Dave]

I have extracted the text from the image you published, to make it searchable and to highlight some of the key parts:

Thank you! I hate fooling around with X posts, one can't copy or sometimes even see all of them without having an account.

Just to reiterate your highlights, this was something we suspected:

As for having it reviewed for public release by State Department, that should be a major red flag. Anything submitted to an organization for public release has a stamp on it. This one doesn't, for one. Secondly if anything, State Department does not review for Public Release other department's information. That's just made up.

Granted, this is the opinion of Kirkpatrick, a known government disinformation and counter-intelligence shill, however the basic facts of what he's saying can be checked. If correct, those few lines about the State Department approval in the "report" are damaging. Critically I would argue. Right from the first paragraph the "report" is incorrect and likely made up. This is a line to make it sound official, or at least that the author was really inside and had his "report" cleared. This likely never happened and wouldn't have happened at the Sate Department.

If the opening paragraph is, at best, some sort of misunderstanding and at worst an outright fabrication about something important like getting proper government clearance, what does that say about the rest of the "report". And really, suggesting it's some sort of misunderstanding is overly generous.

Are we to believe this guy, who works at the DoD took his secret findings from the DoD over to someone at the State Department's Bureau of Global Public Affairs to get it signed off? And they did? I guess one could argue our author showed up with this "report" and someone at State just said: " Yeah, sure go for it. It has nothing to do with us, have fun." Just FYI, there is a real Bureau of Global Public Affairs and they describe their mission like this:

Our Mission
The mission of the Bureau of Global Public Affairs (GPA) is to serve the American people by effectively communicating U.S. foreign policy priorities and the importance of diplomacy to American audiences, and engaging foreign publics to enhance their understanding of and support for the values and policies of the United States.

https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offic...blic-affairs/bureau-of-global-public-affairs/

Doesn't seem to have anything to do with approving super-secret classified information from the DoD for public dissemination, but I don't work in government. Other may know better.

Again, regardless of what Corbel or the Matt Fords of the UFO world think of Kirkpatrick, this is something that can be checked and verified. Something one would certainly think a supposed journalist like Shellenberger would do.

The transcripts of DoD leadership to Congress is particularly entertaining. If such things existed in the way he describes, he certainly wouldn't have access to them through his lawful duties. The only transcripts we had were public record transcripts from hearings.

I think this is referring to this paragraph in the "report" that says the author has seen transcripts of secret meetings between DoD/ARRO and congress that downplays or obfuscates the UAP programs the author claims were happening:

Discrepancies found throughout the internal records of AARO and DoD interactions with • Congress cast serious doubts on the integrity of the DoD's statements to the elected leaders of the United States Government. Extant transcripts held by DoD leadership show a pattern of • trivialization, obfuscation, and outright denial of UAP data in what were intended to be highly classified, private, and transparent conversations with appropriate Congressional members. This same behavior also prevents critical members of Congress from receiving an accurate assessmei1t of the national security risks posed by UAPs.

Sumed up like this:

...and finally, the denial of the existence of IMMACULATE CONSTELLATION by DoD representatives to appropriate Congressional members and their staff.

I, the author know all about this stuff, but congress doesn't. Until now.

This quote though, while maybe not as earth shattereing as the diclosure of IMM CONN, is pretty interesting:

Unfortunately, a number of people upload social media video to our classified systems to talk about. There's a UAP enthusiasts group on the classified system. It would not surprise me if he was referring to that. Anything valid and real would be in AARO's database, which may also be what he's referring to.

Is he saying that UFOlogist in government with access to classified system upload shit from YouTube?! Now that deserves at least a mini-hearing.