Resistance is ramping up against the Department of Defense's attempts to control the media
While the Pentagon has been trying for years to keep the lid on the subject of UAP and the flaws it has allowed to appear in the US national security apparatus, things could be about to change
While the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) is under fire following the publication of its error-ridden historical report and an Eglin case resolution report omitting numerous data contradicting the misplaced balloon hypothesis, certain players are preparing to push back attempts to control the discourse on the strategic stakes of Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena.
Among other criticisms, the report has still not been confirmed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), even though the AARO is under its direction. The ODNI is silent on the matter, and questions Sentinel News put to the ODNI directly over a month ago remain unanswered...
Senator Gillibrand
First in line is New York State Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who was instrumental in setting up the Pentagon and Office of Director of National Intelligence's new UAP study group. The New York Senator was questioned this week by journalist Matt Laslo.
After praising the qualities of AARO's acting director, Timothy Philips, who took over as director following the departure of its controversial head, Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, Gillibrand said:
I let him know that I'd like to have a public hearing this summer.
Some may recall the last public hearing held by the then Director of AARO, when he explained that he considered the hypothesis of an extraterrestrial origin to be possible and pointed to a metal sphere in flight over the city of Mosul as being unidentified. However, several months later, he came back to said UAP, stating that it was probably a prototype for a Chinese observation balloon, despite its extraordinary flying ability.
Gillibrand continued his response by stating that Philips would: "put together some data and information to disclose in a public hearing to show what work they've done, especially examples of things that were unknown that they've been able to figure out, and examples of things that were unknown that they still haven't figured out, so that the public can see the difference between what technology brings to this analysis to inform lawmakers on what we need to do."
It appears that UAP are the subject of many questions from American citizens to members of Congress, proof if ever there was of the importance of opening up channels of communication between them and the electorate.
Gillibrand went on to say that she is working on a bill calling for "more sensors" capable of collecting data in space under the authority of the FAA, but also at high altitude.
She went on to stress the national security issue represented by the foreign drones that have harassed US bases and naval forces in recent years.
Commenting on the Eglin case, she stated:
it's definitely not ‘case closed’. I think that their report was just that their analysis of everything they were shown and everyone they talked to, cause they had no basis to say there's a secret program. But of note, the two whistleblowers that I've met with did not meet with AARO and refused to meet with AARO.
It should be noted that, by stating that the Englin UAP could stem from a classified American program to which AARO did not have access, Gillibrand contradicts the AARO report. Indeed, its former director has stated that he had access to all the necessary information. Gillibrand went further, stating that she herself had access to information that AARO did not have.
While new information, published by FOIA, shows that David Grusch refused to speak to AARO after its director proved unable to ensure the whistleblower's confidentiality clauses were lifted, it appears from the rest of the interview that the New York State Senator could have attended the interview, had it occurred.
Matt Laslo then asked her about the Schumer amendment, which aimed to establish an independent group to declassify information about UAP under the authority of the President of the United States, and which was gutted by the House of Representatives. While Senator Schumer described such a slap in the face as an "outrage", Gillibrand states that it was mainly a matter of protecting secret restricted programs (SAPs). This raises questions about the number of UAP that are in fact secret US programs, and the real level of technological performance of these secret prototypes. The New York State Senator makes it clear that these programs "have nothing to do with the issue of concern, unidentified aerial phenomena".
In this regard, she insists that the major problem for her would be if these UAP were foreign platforms jeopardizing flight safety, and represented a good technological opportunity for rival nations.
Congress
On the subject of the Schumer amendment, many voices, the best known of which is that of lawyer Daniel Sheehan, have stated that amendments are under way to reintroduce the segments withdrawn by the House. A new version is even being written, according to Stanford's Dr Garry Nolan.
SALT
Another sign of the times: the very famous SkyBridge Alternatives Conference (SALT) will host whistleblower David Grusch, as can be seen on their website: "In 2022, Mr. Grusch became the first Federal Whistleblower in US history to file a complaint with the Intelligence Community Inspector General regarding executive branch concealment of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon (UAP) crash retrieval programs from Congress.”
The aim of the SALT conference is to bring together institutional and private investors, in order to put them in touch with private investors and high-tech business leaders. In this context, we might wonder whether Dave Grusch's next appearance will aim at warning the high-tech sector that ground-breaking scientific discoveries are being kept out of commercial circulation, because they are being hidden by the Defense community.
Another speaker at the next SALT conference, General Mark Miley, has declared:
"There is a lot of unexplained aerial phenomena out there. That's true. (...) And they've got pilot reports, there's various other sensors out there, and some of it is difficult to explain.”
Garry Nolan's speech at last year’s SALT conference left a lasting impression, stating that he was "100%" certain that extraterrestrial intelligences had visited Earth.
Citizens
As the mass media cover the subject more and more often, with certain platforms such as Newsnation relaying the latest news on the subject, more and more videos, verified by the editors, are emerging. A recent one was the subject of an in-depth commentary by Robert Spearing, Director of International Investigations at the Mutual UFO Network. Spearing pointed out that the FAA have not provided any answers to the witness's questions, and that expert Tom Wertman has also been unable to identify the object filmed by a passenger on a flight departing from La Guardia airport near New York.
Robert Spearing did, however, offer an analogy with the 1979 case in Italy where a similar cylinder was observed from a plane, and which, according to the Ministry of Defense, turned out to be a cylindrical black plastic balloon. This left many experts dumbfounded, given the quality of the witness at the time - air intelligence pilot Giancarlo Cecconi - and the confirmation by radar control that the object disappeared in a matter of seconds.
Eglin
Reports from armed forces pilots are not uncommon, even if their disclosure to the public is, and the interpretation given by their superiors often raises questions, as was just seen.
One of the most high-profile cases is that of Eglin Air Force Base, where a pilot claimed to have detected several UAP flying in formation, managed to see one and gave a detailed description of the object. The AARO's report on this case raises a number of questions, detailed in our article, notably about its real competence, after its previous report had already been criticized.
In addition, as Sentinel recently reported, new cases similar in location and description have come to light, making the actions of the UFO study program, which is supposed to operate under the authority of the Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence, even more questionable.
While images were published in the public report, the video of the incident, filmed by the pilot, remains, quite strangely, classified.
Media
This strategic weakness was not lost on the media, despite the selective information campaign organized by the Department of Defense. Indeed, a few days before the publication of AARO's historical report, selected interviewees were invited to speak with its former director Sean Kirkpatrick and its acting director Tim Philips. This was followed by the publication of a series of articles relaying the information contained in the historical report, without mentioning the many obvious errors it contained.
However, not everyone was fooled: in articles published in The Hill by former State Department analyst Marik Von Rennenkampf and in The Debrief by Christopher Mellon, the authors pointed out obvious errors in the AARO report.
All these facts call into question the ethics of the Department of Defense. Indeed, the DOD is apparently and constantly trying to diminish the importance of the American intelligence and defense strategic failure, using its channels as well as anonymous sources to give the national media a specific angle on the subject… Despite the many administration and executive officials, right up to the highest levels, who have spoken out on the matter.
But who is most to blame here? The Department of Defense, trying to present itself in the best possible light in a situation where its sensitive areas are violated on an almost daily basis? Or the journalists who relay the information without checking it?
Translation by Guillaume Fournier Airaud
This work is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0