The Black Vault's Twitter Thread on Misleading Claims by Elizondo, TTSA, and Others

[yoshy]

The Black Vault (a website known for collecting UFO related government documents and testimonies) released a lengthy Twitter thread Saturday regarding misleading claims by Elizondo, TTSA, and others related to these names.

Threadreaderapp thread

I think these claims are noteworthy since the Black Vault is well regarded in the UFO community. And I haven't seen direct accusations of misleading statements from Elizondo and TTSA very often.

Some highlights:

And I truly mean DAY ONE of this current conversation.

In the original press conference in October 2017 that introduced Luis Elizondo to the world, a party balloon was shown to depict a tic-tac as Chris Mellon talked.

This, of course, was entirely inaccurate.

Moving on...

In Luis Elizondo's Oct. 2018 lecture in Italy telling the world stage about UFOs, he talked about a series of events where in 1952 UFOs were seen buzzing the Capitol and the White House.

He showed "real photographs" that consisted of a CGI construct, and a cartoon.

That press release outlined numerous pieces were acquired by TTSA, which come from "an advanced aerospace vehicle of unknown origin."

In that announcement? They show a rock known as "malachite" from a stock photo house.

 

[yoshy]

Elizondo has responded on his Twitter

1. It's been brought to my attention an inconsistency of the Sun's article of an alleged NSA document. For the record, I never vouched for its voracity, I used it as an example of increasing government transparency over the last four years. I simply quoted the headline that's all

2. As I said from day one, I shall always hold myself accountable. In 2018, when I provided the briefing in Italy, within 24 hours I issued a correction for the record. Again holding myself accountable.

3. As for the individuals in Unidentified, two of those individuals were indeed affiliated with the program. As for the other individual, he was looking for a job, and the two affiliated were considering bringing him onboard. Later did they determine he would NOT be a good fit.

 

[jarlrmai]

Pretty sure we mentioned the malachite image back nearer the time, we may have covered the other ones.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ttsas-metamaterials.10840/#post-233703

Elizondo etc seems have stopped linking themselves to contemporary/historical UFO accounts recently, I think they realised they were going to be either solved by Mick/metabunk etc or could be hoaxes.

 

[yoshy]

Pretty sure we mentioned the malachite image back nearer the time, we may have covered the other ones.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ttsas-metamaterials.10840/#post-233703

Elizondo etc seems have stopped linking themselves to contemporary/historical UFO accounts recently, I think they realised they were going to be either solved by Mick/metabunk etc or could be hoaxes.

I should've assumed you guys spotted all this immediately lol.

I think it's still the first time another big name in the UFO community has called out Elizondo like this.

 

[Ravi]

I should've assumed you guys spotted all this immediately lol.

I think it's still the first time another big name in the UFO community has called out Elizondo like this.

The more they call out each other, the better it is. Let them fight among each other, so that we don't have to.

 

[deirdre]

I think it's still the first time another big name in the UFO community has called out Elizondo like this.

Black Vault has been calling out elizondo and ttsa since the very beginning.

 

[deirdre]

The more they call out each other, the better it is. Let them fight among each other, so that we don't have to.

i dont think it matters much whether the fact checker is part of a community or not. i think you get attacked just as hard if you dare speak out at all against the 'accepted narrative', even if you are part of the group.

Article:

15/ I, yet again, am reminded about the double standard that exists within the UFO conversation. I won't be afraid to "call out" (that isn't a "call to arms" as some want you to believe I meant) the inconsistencies.

Source: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1495064597421649921.html

a few people who shared their stories about 'escaping the rabbit hole', mentioned this phenomenon as a big reason they started to change their minds on issues. ie. getting attacked from their own side for simply correcting one or two things that were demonstratably false.

 

[Ann K]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1495064597421649921.html

"...the Black Vault is well regarded in the UFO community."

Isn't that what's referred to as "damning with faint praise"?

 

[yoshy]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1495064597421649921.html

Isn't that what's referred to as "damning with faint praise"?

No I meant that sincerely. We've seen Mick's comments get written off in the UFO community (just read any Reddit thread) because he's seen as an outsider and "debunker". But since the UFO community usually applauds Black Vault's efforts, I doubt they'll just ignore his criticisms

 

[nomuybueno]

If you had any doubts that Luis Elizondo is just leading people along, then please watch his speach at the "Anomalous Aerospace Phenomena Conference 2019" He really hurt his credibility here. He says multiple times throughout this

Elizondo: This is not a get rich quick scheme.

Elizondo: I know things that I can't tell you.

Elizondo: That's not a lens flare [sic]

Source:
Source: https://youtu.be/Vca10wuiMtE?t=2

 

[Skalman]

Jeremy McGowan finally got it in writing via a FOIA request: the DoD IG never did try corroborate Elizondo's statement that he was the director of AATIP:

Subject: RE: DODOIG-2023–001056 Task Details (Mr. Jeremy McGowan) suspense date: 7/10/2023
Sir,
We were specifically asked to provide any and all documents used to substantiate the statement that Mr. Elizondo was a Supervisory Intelligence Operations Specialist with the AATIP.
BLUF: the DoD OIG did not ever definitively establish Mr. Elizodo's role with the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). In his interview (attachment 1) with us on May 19, 2021, Mr. Elizondo asserted that he was running the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program for the Undersecretary of Defense (Intelligence). We did not challenge his assertion, nor did we undertake any investigative activities specifically designed to confirm or disprove it…

source:
Source: https://medium.com/@osirisuap/lue-elizondo-aatip-and-the-dod-office-of-inspector-general-d845fca2725c

 

[Duke]

Jeremy McGowan finally got it in writing via a FOIA request: the DoD IG never did try corroborate Elizondo's statement that he was the director of AATIP:

source:
Source: https://medium.com/@osirisuap/lue-elizondo-aatip-and-the-dod-office-of-inspector-general-d845fca2725c

Do we have a copy of Elizondo's IG complaint? Do we know if Elizondo requested the IG to do so? They would have attempted to corroborate his title/position description only if doing so was part of his complaint.

 

[Skalman]

Do we have a copy of Elizondo's IG complaint? Do we know if Elizondo requested the IG to do so? They would have attempted to corroborate his title/position description only if doing so was part of his complaint.

I don't think so. Yeah, I know, thanks to you, actually, that the IG wouldn't have attempted to do that if it wasn't part of the complaint, but many people have claimed that the emails where he is referred to by that title was confirmation that he was telling the truth about that (no matter what people with real, actual relevant experience of work in the US government said) and now there's finally proof that they were wrong to make that assumption.

 

[john.phil]

Do we have a copy of Elizondo's IG complaint?

There is a redacted version, which I'm attaching.

 

[FatPhil]

There is a redacted version, which I'm attaching.

My main take-away from reading that is that the guy who was appraised as 5/5 ("outstanding") for "Communication" (p. 27): spells "government" "goverment"; spells "illegal" "illigal" (both p. 5); and repeatedly addresses a guy who he thinks he is close enough to and friendly enough with to include informal postscripts such as "let me know when you want to go and kill some fish! I have access to an awesome 35 Trojan that is a serious fishing machine in the Bay! I'll buy the bait!" (p. 37) "Neil", despite the fact that his name is "Neill" (p. 4, p. 10, pp. 36-40, p. 58) - and indeed, he should be close enough to know Neill's name, as it appears that Mr. Tipton was Luis' "supervisor" (p. 10).

(And yes, I did spot the three different spellings of "gimbal" too, but that wasn't at Lue's hand, so doesn't reflect on Lue's communication skills at all.)

So If Neill has a bit of a grudge against Lue, it might in part be because Lue not once got his name right?

 

[Duke]

I don't think so. Yeah, I know, thanks to you, actually, that the IG wouldn't have attempted to do that if it wasn't part of the complaint, but many people have claimed that the emails where he is referred to by that title was confirmation that he was telling the truth about that (no matter what people with real, actual relevant experience of work in the US government said) and now there's finally proof that they were wrong to make that assumption.

I haven't read the entire package, but your reference to "that title" above is, I assume, "Supervisory Intelligence Operations Specialist" as referenced in your post #11 above. If anything, having that title (and corresponding position description) lends less credence to his claim of running ATTIP.

There is a nuance here that I think many would overlook. You "supervise" people, you "manage" programs. There are, in effect, dual careers paths in DoD, supervisory and non-supervisory. The former involves what is termed "care and feeding" of employees. A supervisor's responsibilities are primarily personnel administrative in nature. Their job is to coordinate/track the career progression of their subordinates, not run programs.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

I haven't read the entire package, but your reference to "that title" above is, I assume, "Supervisory Intelligence Operations Specialist" as referenced in your post #11 above. If anything, having that title (and corresponding position description) lends less credence to his claim of running ATTIP.

There is a nuance here that I think many would overlook. You "supervise" people, you "manage" programs. There are, in effect, dual careers paths in DoD, supervisory and non-supervisory. The former involves what is termed "care and feeding" of employees. A supervisor's responsibilities are primarily personnel administrative in nature. Their job is to coordinate/track the career progression of their subordinates, not run programs.

SIOS do run some programs but heavily context dependent, granted in relation to AATIP there's other things pointing towards him not having that role (ie being D/NPSMS at the same exact time). Here's an example - https://www.usajobs.gov/job/767842400.

For Elizondo the SIOS role just as easily validates his position as D/NSPMS, which we have more sourcing to back. Granted at the moment the SIOSs at NPSMS act as advisors to the current director, the current D/NPSMS does not appear to be a SIOS.
Given we have pretty limited information about the actual organizational formulation here of the real or supposed "AATIP", we don't know what line Elizondo would've been acting in either. What function the SIOS takes differs significantly depending on where they're at, like, if you went to an Air Wing they would not be running things really, they'd just be supervising a group of analysts, so at the most managing their reporting cycle. Contrasting from that, INR over at State has SIOSs acting as directors of a few Offices, DCSA has a bunch of SIOS managing functions, SIOSs manage most of the functions over at Treasuries CI and Insider Threat Programs, and countless other examples where they actually act as managers to form rather than just supervisors.

The Intelligence Operations Specialists have their own little side grading, you have the base IOS, you have Senior Intelligence Operation Specialists, then your Supervisory IOS. SIOS is the highest you go in that side formulation and you tend to see it with folks in the 14-15 grade from what I've seen. Think 13 floats at some places.

 

[OSIRISUAP]

My first Metabunk post.
Glad that folks are digging into the FOIA response. Please let me know if you have any questions I can help answer.

 

[Mendel]

Given we have pretty limited information about the actual organizational formulation here of the real or supposed "AATIP"

the new AARO report was pretty explicit

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

the new AARO report was pretty explicit

Organizational formulation in terms of it's actual placement in terms of organizational structure and the technical chain it was under. The new AARO report doesn't really define this, all we know is that it was operated under DIA. If I had to guess, it was suppose to be under either their Directorate of Science & Technology or the Directorate of Analysis. These further split, respectively, into dozens of offices and branches with different functional areas, and it'd be "under" one of these, or under something within them. There's also standalone Centers but I doubt it would've been under those. This heavily dictates how actual jobs work.
For example, generally, Supervisory Intelligence Operation Specialists are not managers, but instead supervisors, as Duke touched on the distinction of. This is not a 1-1 thing though and it changes depending on where you work and sometimes how big it is. At an Air Wing, a SIOS is supervising a handful of analysts. SOCOMS J3X on the other hand has an acting Program Manager who is a SIOS. As do various offices at States INR and DCSA, they seem to have a lot of SIOSs acting as Program Managers specifically, rather than just supervisors, compared to other agencies across the govt and the DoD.
Knowing the actual chain of AAWSAP/AATIP in this regard allows us to delve more into how likely it was that Elizondo was involved in the actual real AATIP/AAWSAP. For example, if AAWSAP was buried under a Branch led by a SIOS, it's unlikely the programs under that branch are also being individually ran by SIOSs reporting to another one, it'd be more likely those individuals were Senior IOSs. Knowing Elizondo actually was a SIOS, if this was the case, that'd count against his claim of actually being in or even managing AAWSAP/AATIP.

 

[Duke]

SIOS do run some programs but heavily context dependent, granted in relation to AATIP there's other things pointing towards him not having that role (ie being D/NPSMS at the same exact time). Here's an example - https://www.usajobs.gov/job/767842400.
View attachment 67519

That's why I said "primarily" when describing the responsibilities of those filling supervisory positions. In my experience, it was not out of the ordinary for them to get detailed as "grey beards" to participate in/run things like Independent Review Teams (IRTs), source selections, policy reviews, murder boards, etc. Such assignments were temporary and in addition to their supervisory duties.

For Elizondo the SIOS role just as easily validates his position as D/NSPMS, which we have more sourcing to back. Granted at the moment the SIOSs at NPSMS act as advisors to the current director, the current D/NPSMS does notappear to be a SIOS.

Given we have pretty limited information about the actual organizational formulation here of the real or supposed "AATIP", we don't know what line Elizondo would've been acting in either. What function the SIOS takes differs significantly depending on where they're at, like, if you went to an Air Wing they would not be running things really, they'd just be supervising a group of analysts, so at the most managing their reporting cycle. Contrasting from that, INR over at State has SIOSs acting as directors of a few Offices, DCSA has a bunch of SIOS managing functions, SIOSs manage most of the functions over at Treasuries CI and Insider Threat Programs, and countless other examples where they actually act as managers to form rather than just supervisors.

I was detailed into an acting branch chief (supervisory coded) job for three months when the previous guy retirement. I hated it. I spent all my time running down man-hour accounting data, tracking completion of mandatory training requirements, working within grade step increases, updating personnel files, writing award nominations, etc.

Since there were CGOs assigned to the branch, I also had military personnel responsibilities like writing (thankfully only the first cut of) Officer Evaluation Reports (OER) and Promotion Recommendation Forms (PMF), tracking Professional Military Education (PME), reviewing assignment "dream sheets" etc. I once was even required to escort a young officer to the dispensary to witness him urinate in a cup for his random drug urinalysis ("golden flow") to certify the urine submitted was his own. I considered that above and beyond.

I declined to interview for the position, no way I wanted to do that job full-time

The Intelligence Operations Specialists have their own little side grading, you have the base IOS, you have Senior Intelligence Operation Specialists, then your Supervisory IOS. SIOS is the highest you go in that side formulation and you tend to see it with folks in the 14-15 grade from what I've seen. Think 13 floats at some places.

Grade inflation is fairly common in DC, and in the Pentagon in particular. Even with locality pay, the expense of living in DC was such that a higher grade was needed to induce people to move there. Wasn't uncommon for some of my colleagues to take a job/promotion in DC, then work to come back at that higher grade in a year or two.

 

[Mendel]

Knowing the actual chain of AAWSAP/AATIP in this regard

yes, but there was never anything official for AATIP-that-was-not-AAWSAP.
You have to look to AAWSAP for something with a budget and presumably an org chart.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

yes, but there was never anything official for AATIP-that-was-not-AAWSAP.
You have to look to AAWSAP for something with a budget and presumably an org chart.

Yeah I used the / elsewhere to define since the original AATIP term came from the actual AAWSAP, and Elizondo's later-referenced "AATIP" (separate from AAWSAP) wasn't an actual thing, so it wouldn't be on paper anyways, though he continuously terms it that.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Knowing the actual chain of AAWSAP/AATIP in this regard allows us to delve more into how likely it was that Elizondo was involved in the actual real AATIP/AAWSAP.

James Lacatski wrote the RFP and administered the contract to BAASS for AAWSAP. He was in the DoD, DIA, DWO:

In 2007, Dr. James T. Lacatski was an intelligence officer serving in the Defense Intelligence Agency's Defense Warning Office (DWO). He served as Team Leader for writing the annual Missile Defense Threat Environment series, the SECRET-level threat documents used by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

(pg. 19) Kelleher, Colm A.. Skinwalkers at the Pentagon: An Insiders' Account of the Secret Government UFO Program. RTMA, LLC. Kindle Edition.

If that helps at all.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

James Lacatski wrote the RFP and administered the contract to BAASS for AAWSAP. He was in the DoD, DIA, DWO:

In 2007, Dr. James T. Lacatski was an intelligence officer serving in the Defense Intelligence Agency's Defense Warning Office (DWO). He served as Team Leader for writing the annual Missile Defense Threat Environment series, the SECRET-level threat documents used by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA).

(pg. 19) Kelleher, Colm A.. Skinwalkers at the Pentagon: An Insiders' Account of the Secret Government UFO Program. RTMA, LLC. Kindle Edition.

If that helps at all.

Good point I'd forgot that little nugget in the book. That could potentially track honestly, DWO has a new name but it split into some relevant Divisions. I know the DIRDs were technically commissioned out of it.
Random sidenote, I wonder how many of the key players Kirkpatrick references were actually in DWO. Stratton was Chief of Air and Space Warfare (not a SIOS by title but not sure if the role is applicable to them, no public record there) there for a bit, not sure if it's at the same time as Lacatski though.
Knowing more here about Stratton's role than Lacatski's, I would say this makes it pretty darn unlikely that Elizondo was involved with AAWSAP/real AATIP while he was an acting SIOS, unless it was just being ran aside from DWO and not part of any specific Division or Branch within it. Still an even stronger red flag to put to that claim.

 

[NorCal Dave]

Good point I'd forgot that little nugget in the book. That could potentially track honestly, DWO has a new name but it split into some relevant Divisions. I know the DIRDs were technically commissioned out of it.
Random sidenote, I wonder how many of the key players Kirkpatrick references were actually in DWO. Stratton was Chief of Air and Space Warfare (not a SIOS by title but not sure if the role is applicable to them, no public record there) there for a bit, not sure if it's at the same time as Lacatski though.
Knowing more here about Stratton's role than Lacatski's, I would say this makes it pretty darn unlikely that Elizondo was involved with AAWSAP/real AATIP while he was an acting SIOS, unless it was just being ran aside from DWO and not part of any specific Division or Branch within it. Still an even stronger red flag to put to that claim.

According to Lacatski/Kelleher/Knapp in the book, Elizondo had nothing to do with AAWSAP outside of a few early meetings. In his IG complaint, Elizondo claims he took over AAWSAP from Lacatski as he had been running the AATIP portion of AAWSAP. And that during 2010-2012 he minimized AAWSAP:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cgqoaeore81lbxs/Luis Elizondo IG Complaint Redacted.pdf?dl=0

Of course, Lacatski the man created and oversaw AAWSAP claims AATIP was a made up "nickname" to hide the identiy of AAWSAP:

A new unclassified nickname, the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), was created for use within the unclassified letter because it was decided for security reasons not to use the AAWSAP acronym. Reid's letter was carefully crafted to initiate the process of urgently conferring Special Access Program (SAP) status to some of the more sensitive projects at BAASS.

pg: 90-91

And that a name like AATIP could not be used as it would not route the money to Lacatski to hand out to BAASS:

No other names for the program were either contemplated or discussed; this AAWSAP name was created in order to make sure the $22 million Program Element (PE) reached DWO, and only DWO, at DIA. No variations on the AAWSAP name would have been allowed because of the technical nature of the PE financial conduit.

pg: 42

Lacatski claims AAWSAP had only been funded for FY 2009-2010 and there was no money for 2011:

For FY11, congressional funding was not available, otherwise AAWSAP could have continued in the DIA for the 3rd year.

pg: 27

Note also Elizondo's claims about funding for 2012 above. He says AATIP got 10 million, but it was used elsewhere. Lacatski tells a similar story, but no mention of AATIP or Elizondo:

Money was available for FY12, but money was not the only issue.

As the AAWSAP program manager since its beginning at DIA, Lacatski knew that in order to continue the successes achieved and to reach its full potential, the program needed to move out of the Department of Defense (DoD). For FY12, DIA leadership had tried to transfer the program within the DoD, but without success and, unfortunately, missing the fiscal year's appropriation deadline. Since AAWSAP was not strictly defense-oriented in nature, on February 7, 2011, Lacatski gave a very in depth briefing to colleagues at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate.

Lacatski worked with both senators to achieve the goal of a new DHS AAWSAP-like effort, but DHS leadership ultimately did not accept the new funding.

For FY14 with the assistance of Congressman Steny Hoyer, and again in FY15, Senator Reid and Lacatski attempted to fund AAWSAP through the DoD. Both attempts failed. Finally, on May 13, 2016, Lacatski retired from government service. So, after nine years of effort, the work of AAWSAP ended.

pg: 27-29

Their stories do not mesh.

Stratton is the more interesting character. He's the "throughput" if you will. He was part of AAWSAP with Lacatski, went to Skinwalker Ranch, then probably helped create the unfunded, unofficial UFO club with Elizondo using the AATIP fake acronym. He stayed on after Elizondo quit and went public and was in the right place to head up the UAP Task Force a few years later.

As he was still active duty when Lacatski/Kelleher/Knapp's book came out, he was called Axelrod in it.

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

According to Lacatski/Kelleher/Knapp in the book, Elizondo had nothing to do with AAWSAP outside of a few early meetings. In his IG complaint, Elizondo claims he took over AAWSAP from Lacatski as he had been running the AATIP portion of AAWSAP. And that during 2010-2012 he minimized AAWSAP:

View attachment 67537
https://www.dropbox.com/s/cgqoaeore81lbxs/Luis Elizondo IG Complaint Redacted.pdf?dl=0

Of course, Lacatski the man created and oversaw AAWSAP claims AATIP was a made up "nickname" to hide the identiy of AAWSAP:

A new unclassified nickname, the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), was created for use within the unclassified letter because it was decided for security reasons not to use the AAWSAP acronym. Reid's letter was carefully crafted to initiate the process of urgently conferring Special Access Program (SAP) status to some of the more sensitive projects at BAASS.

pg: 90-91

And that a name like AATIP could not be used as it would not route the money to Lacatski to hand out to BAASS:

No other names for the program were either contemplated or discussed; this AAWSAP name was created in order to make sure the $22 million Program Element (PE) reached DWO, and only DWO, at DIA. No variations on the AAWSAP name would have been allowed because of the technical nature of the PE financial conduit.

pg: 42

Lacatski claims AAWSAP had only been funded for FY 2009-2010 and there was no money for 2011:

For FY11, congressional funding was not available, otherwise AAWSAP could have continued in the DIA for the 3rd year.

pg: 27

Note also Elizondo's claims about funding for 2012 above. He says AATIP got 10 million, but it was used elsewhere. Lacatski tells a similar story, but no mention of AATIP or Elizondo:

Money was available for FY12, but money was not the only issue.

As the AAWSAP program manager since its beginning at DIA, Lacatski knew that in order to continue the successes achieved and to reach its full potential, the program needed to move out of the Department of Defense (DoD). For FY12, DIA leadership had tried to transfer the program within the DoD, but without success and, unfortunately, missing the fiscal year's appropriation deadline. Since AAWSAP was not strictly defense-oriented in nature, on February 7, 2011, Lacatski gave a very in depth briefing to colleagues at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate.

Lacatski worked with both senators to achieve the goal of a new DHS AAWSAP-like effort, but DHS leadership ultimately did not accept the new funding.

For FY14 with the assistance of Congressman Steny Hoyer, and again in FY15, Senator Reid and Lacatski attempted to fund AAWSAP through the DoD. Both attempts failed. Finally, on May 13, 2016, Lacatski retired from government service. So, after nine years of effort, the work of AAWSAP ended.

pg: 27-29

Their stories do not mesh.

Stratton is the more interesting character. He's the "throughput" if you will. He was part of AAWSAP with Lacatski, went to Skinwalker Ranch, then probably helped create the unfunded, unofficial UFO club with Elizondo using the AATIP fake acronym. He stayed on after Elizondo quit and went public and was in the right place to head up the UAP Task Force a few years later.

As he was still active duty when Lacatski/Kelleher/Knapp's book came out, he was called Axelrod in it.

Indeed, just to note, I don't believe Elizondo was, I just think this is another piece of data we can use to indicate it's not really likely or possible in some regard. The more the merrier, especially if we begin to do things like Social Network Analysis surrounding the figures here, these little pieces would be important for that. From that frame for example, I believe, Elizondo would probably not be a center figure, it would probably be Stratton or another individual. Granted I don't have enough data to run a quality one yet so don't want to stand too heavy there. That'd in the end tell us a lot about the actual network of folks here participating.
I am curious, I do not believe he would have been D/NPSMS the entire timeline here, so, I am curious what other roles Elizondo held during the overall span starting from 2008ish, and if those ones also put him close in interaction with Lacatski & co.

 

[NorCal Dave]

I am curious what other roles Elizondo held during the overall span starting from 2008ish, and if those ones also put him close in interaction with Lacatski & co.

This is one of the few mentions I remember in the book concerning Elizondo:

Further down the dinner table sat Luis Elizondo, who worked collaboratively with Axelrod and was at the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (USDI). Elizondo looked dapper with jet black hair and was considered a brilliant Special Agent and analyst with a lot of expertise on counterintelligence investigations. Little did anyone at that dinner table realize that nine years later Lue Elizondo would become a media star and a household name in global UAP investigations. As he enjoyed his steak tartare, Elizondo regaled those around him with some war stories, including one hair-raising exploit about how his advanced intuition and remote viewing capabilities had saved his life and the life of his men while on a covert combat mission in war-torn Afghanistan.

pg: 49

Again, Lacatski & Co. claim AATIP was not a reformed version of AAWSAP or a part of it, rather a made-up name that got adopted by Axelrod (Stratton) and others as part of an unofficial UFO club that eventually led to the UAP Task Force (bold by me):

After AAWSAP had shut down, the AATIP designation was used to describe a completely separate, small initiative that was underway at the Pentagon to study UAPs encountered by military personnel. AATIP involved a small group of people working on the UAP problem, with direct knowledge of their superiors, when their day jobs allowed them to.

The creation of AAWSAP and its pioneering investigation of the Tic Tac case with Axelrod and team was directly responsible for the later establishment of a smaller, corollary effort, called AATIP inside the Pentagon that focused exclusively on UAP encounter incidents involving US military personnel. The small cadre of UFO-curious military personnel occasionally consulted some of the same scientists who had worked with NIDS and BAASS. The core of that group formed the basis for what became the UAP Task Force, formally created by Congress in the summer of 2020 (but which had already been operating for a few years, despite not having a budget, an office, or a formal name)

pg: 157-159

Putting on my tin-foil-hat, I'll note that Skinwalkers at the Pentagon came out in October 2021, so would have been written maybe during COVID in 2020, maybe late 2019? Elizondo's big splash was in 2017 and by 2020 some people were questioning some of his claims. Specifically, if he was claiming to have run AATIP as if it were AAWSAP when he didn't, maybe the authors sorta politely distanced themselves from his claims. They just wrote him out of the narrative. Maybe he was more involved than they claim, but still wasn't running the show.

This is a great slide that @jackfrostvc found from a presentation by Elizondo. By the time of this conference, AAWSAP had become known, thus casting doubt on the claim of running AATIP, so Elizondo suggested that AAWSAP was renamed AATIP. But it looks like the slide says that happened in 2008 to my eyes. How does one rename a program that wasn't off the ground and running until 2009?

 

[Tezcatlipoca]

This is one of the few mentions I remember in the book concerning Elizondo:

Further down the dinner table sat Luis Elizondo, who worked collaboratively with Axelrod and was at the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (USDI). Elizondo looked dapper with jet black hair and was considered a brilliant Special Agent and analyst with a lot of expertise on counterintelligence investigations. Little did anyone at that dinner table realize that nine years later Lue Elizondo would become a media star and a household name in global UAP investigations. As he enjoyed his steak tartare, Elizondo regaled those around him with some war stories, including one hair-raising exploit about how his advanced intuition and remote viewing capabilities had saved his life and the life of his men while on a covert combat mission in war-torn Afghanistan.

pg: 49

Again, Lacatski & Co. claim AATIP was not a reformed version of AAWSAP or a part of it, rather a made-up name that got adopted by Axelrod (Stratton) and others as part of an unofficial UFO club that eventually led to the UAP Task Force (bold by me):

After AAWSAP had shut down, the AATIP designation was used to describe a completely separate, small initiative that was underway at the Pentagon to study UAPs encountered by military personnel. AATIP involved a small group of people working on the UAP problem, with direct knowledge of their superiors, when their day jobs allowed them to.

The creation of AAWSAP and its pioneering investigation of the Tic Tac case with Axelrod and team was directly responsible for the later establishment of a smaller, corollary effort, called AATIP inside the Pentagon that focused exclusively on UAP encounter incidents involving US military personnel. The small cadre of UFO-curious military personnel occasionally consulted some of the same scientists who had worked with NIDS and BAASS. The core of that group formed the basis for what became the UAP Task Force, formally created by Congress in the summer of 2020 (but which had already been operating for a few years, despite not having a budget, an office, or a formal name)

pg: 157-159

Putting on my tin-foil-hat, I'll note that Skinwalkers at the Pentagon came out in October 2021, so would have been written maybe during COVID in 2020, maybe late 2019? Elizondo's big splash was in 2017 and by 2020 some people were questioning some of his claims. Specifically, if he was claiming to have run AATIP as if it were AAWSAP when he didn't, maybe the authors sorta politely distanced themselves from his claims. They just wrote him out of the narrative. Maybe he was more involved than they claim, but still wasn't running the show.

This is a great slide that @jackfrostvc found from a presentation by Elizondo. By the time of this conference, AAWSAP had become known, thus casting doubt on the claim of running AATIP, so Elizondo suggested that AAWSAP was renamed AATIP. But it looks like the slide says that happened in 2008 to my eyes. How does one rename a program that wasn't off the ground and running until 2009?

View attachment 67564

Yeah no the "renaming" part from him has already been discounted. That doesn't mean there wasn't any closeness between them as individuals, for example, being detailed to the same Office at some point but working different programs. 2008-2012 though is quite a long time ago, and the sourcing we have about him being Director of the National Program Special Management Staff comes from his 2017 resignation. There is a decent possibility he wasn't the D/NPSMS at the time AAWSAP was active but was working somewhere else that let him be in contact with Stratton at least or maybe also Lacatski, this could've been where they initially met also.