Rep. Luna Requests UAP Video, With a List of Names.
- Thread starter Mick West
- Start date
RobertBillyBob
Senior Member.
I hope they won't be released publicly all at once, all kinds of spurious claims would propagate before even a quarter of the videos would be properly analyzed.
Nemon
Senior Member.
It seems to me that at least some of them have already been properly analyzed – for example 17. F‑18 FLIR UAP. Unfortunately, the case files are not clearly identifiable. Are they perhaps referring to an AARO cataloging system?
jackfrostvc
Senior Member.
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
Most of the videos seem to be from the last 5-6 years, so I would assume some of these are from late generation sensors systems. Maybe the type of stuff AARO or the DoD would keep classified or at least not publicly shared. Videos like TicTak from 20 year old systems might be different from sharing what's in current front line use.
Some of these names are rather vague. It may be difficult to identify what actual item they are asking for.
Of course that may be intentional, hoping that they will get many items that 'sort of' match the description.
Although I would suspect that they already have clipped or edited versions of all of these from some source or another and are hoping that the "official" version will be more revealing.
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
You joke, but Rep Anna Paulina Luna stands out in the US Congress as being unusually friendly to Russian officials and has taken them on personal tours of the US Capitol, and has served as a conduit for Russian intel to inject documents into Congress.
I am guessing Corbell and/or Grusch are involved in creating these lists. Corbell has long had one or more sources in the military who has access to a secure file server and has been leaking short re-recorded clips to him along with whatever interpretation that person came up with about it. Grusch himself was one of Corbell's anonymous sources before he went public, and Grusch now works for Burlison.
It seems like many or most of the recent "leaked" videos were recorded off of screens with cell phones or other devices, obscuring some key data for the sleuths here while the leaker tries to avoid leaving direct fingerprints from downloading files.
jarlrmai
Senior Member.
Aye, I was only partially joking..
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
One would not need a degree to join the USAF, though they would be an enlisted person and not an officer. It depends on the person's situation. Some join to learn transferable skills like working on aircraft, or some join to earn collage money. One of our son's high school friends was a sharp kid, but his home life made collage a challenge. He joined the Air Force out of high school and quickly moved up as a translator and intell person, though not an officer. All officers must have a BA/BS or better.
Luna served in the Air National Guard as an enlisted person and latter earned a BS afterwards:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Paulina_LunaExternal Quote:
Any US citizen can run for office. And win.
Jay Y
Member
Nemon
Senior Member.
I'm trying to sketch a basic framework for how to think about the different UAP data holdings and catalogues that might sit behind Luna's list, before we jump to specific case‑matches.
Recent official and semi‑official material paints a UAP data landscape that looks much more like a patchwork than a clean, unified catalogue. The AARO Historical Record Report Volume 1 explicitly describes scattered, incomplete historical records and data‑quality issues, even while it dismisses many of the stronger crash‑retrieval claims:
https://media.defense.gov/2024/Mar/...RO-HISTORICAL-RECORD-REPORT-VOLUME-1-2024.PDF
On top of that, AARO's later UAP Workshop paper on "Narrative Data, Infrastructures, and Analysis" talks in some detail about the coexistence of historical case files, contemporary narrative reports, and various sensor data streams (radar, FLIR, FMV, flight data, etc.), all split across different databases with inconsistent metadata, classification barriers, and plain missing records (Nimitz being the stock example):
https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/Information Papers/2025_UAP_Workshop_Paper.pdf
What we do not have, though, is any explicit mapping from these internal systems to Luna's titles and numbers. There is no public indication that "17. F‑18 FLIR UAP" corresponds to a specific AARO case ID, or that the naming scheme in the letter is a direct export of an AARO taxonomy as opposed to a mixed list of call‑signs, operational labels, and intelligence report identifiers. From what is publicly available, the "case files" behind the list are simply not uniquely identifiable.
Against that background, it seems more cautious to treat Luna's list as a pointer into a larger, fragmented internal case landscape, rather than as something we can cleanly line up with known AARO case numbers or specific leaked videos at this stage.
At the same time, the fact that Luna submitted this numbered list as a formal request to Secretary Hegseth strongly suggests that these labels do correspond to identifiable cases in some internal DoD/IC system – otherwise the Department could hardly action the request in a meaningful way – but from the outside we simply cannot see which underlying catalogue or schema they map onto, or how directly it overlaps with AARO's own case identifiers. Am I getting that right?
Recent official and semi‑official material paints a UAP data landscape that looks much more like a patchwork than a clean, unified catalogue. The AARO Historical Record Report Volume 1 explicitly describes scattered, incomplete historical records and data‑quality issues, even while it dismisses many of the stronger crash‑retrieval claims:
https://media.defense.gov/2024/Mar/...RO-HISTORICAL-RECORD-REPORT-VOLUME-1-2024.PDF
On top of that, AARO's later UAP Workshop paper on "Narrative Data, Infrastructures, and Analysis" talks in some detail about the coexistence of historical case files, contemporary narrative reports, and various sensor data streams (radar, FLIR, FMV, flight data, etc.), all split across different databases with inconsistent metadata, classification barriers, and plain missing records (Nimitz being the stock example):
https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/Information Papers/2025_UAP_Workshop_Paper.pdf
External Quote:
That picture seems broadly compatible with the idea that several of the cases on Luna's list could already have been analyzed in detail somewhere inside this ecosystem, even if only a small subset has ever surfaced publicly – and even if no single office (including AARO) actually has a perfectly consolidated, queryable "master catalogue".External Quote:
What we do not have, though, is any explicit mapping from these internal systems to Luna's titles and numbers. There is no public indication that "17. F‑18 FLIR UAP" corresponds to a specific AARO case ID, or that the naming scheme in the letter is a direct export of an AARO taxonomy as opposed to a mixed list of call‑signs, operational labels, and intelligence report identifiers. From what is publicly available, the "case files" behind the list are simply not uniquely identifiable.
Against that background, it seems more cautious to treat Luna's list as a pointer into a larger, fragmented internal case landscape, rather than as something we can cleanly line up with known AARO case numbers or specific leaked videos at this stage.
At the same time, the fact that Luna submitted this numbered list as a formal request to Secretary Hegseth strongly suggests that these labels do correspond to identifiable cases in some internal DoD/IC system – otherwise the Department could hardly action the request in a meaningful way – but from the outside we simply cannot see which underlying catalogue or schema they map onto, or how directly it overlaps with AARO's own case identifiers. Am I getting that right?
Similar threads
Trending content
-
Thread 'Reported drones over Fort Lesley McNair and possible DC counter-UAS laser deployment'- Kyle Ferriter
Replies: 2 -
-
-
-