anticipated open hearings on UAPs lasted less than 90 minutes and the blanket
of national security was a topic that was addressed often, something that I had
expected. Of course, when you’re talking about intelligence gathering,
regardless of the focus of that intelligence gathering, means, methods and
sources are something to be protected. As was mentioned more than once, we don’t
want our competitors in the world to know what our abilities are… or what our
shortcomings might be.
of the first things we learned is that the pronunciation of the new office is
AIMSOG and I was certainly glad that we could clear that up. And we were told
that there had been no official investigation into UFOs, I mean, UAPs, since
the closure of Project Blue Book, which, of course, ignored Moon Dust and other
regulations that did require some reporting. There were also other
investigations, or rather official panels, boards or organizations that dealt
with the problem of UFOs, that the Air Force ran in the 1950s and 1960s.
fellows on the hot seats were Ronald Moultrie, (seen here) listed as the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence & Security and Scott Bray, the Deputy Director of
set the tone, the second question asked of Moultrie, was about his interest in
science fiction. Moultrie confessed that he was interested in SF and that he
had actually attended some science fiction conventions, but not in costume. He
also mentioned that he had met with the chairman of the committee, André Carson,
in the last week and I suspect the question was designed to mitigate attempts
to belittle Moultrie by someone learning that he was interested in science
fiction and therefore was a biased source or maybe somehow unqualified because
he read science fiction.
was clear from the questions of most of the congressmen in attendance that
alien visitation wasn’t actually on their radar. The questions tended to be
about the capabilities of our adversaries in the world and if they could be
responsible for some of the intrusions into our airspace and the training areas.
It was that national security thing again.
learned that they now had 400 reports, some of which were historic in nature, meaning
that they were mainly anecdotal, that they were just witness testimony, as if
that was sufficient cause for them to be ignored. They did say that there were
18 of the reports that might represent an advance in technology, but I had the
impression they thought that technology was terrestrially based and came from
China or Russia.
were two videos shown. One was a fleeting image, which, I suspect was selected
because it demonstrated the fleeting nature of many observations. A look at any
data base shows that there are many sightings that last less than ten seconds.
For the most part, these sightings are nearly useless, and I believe that was
why we were treated to Bray attempting to freeze the video to show the object
in it and not having much luck in isolating the particular frame or frames. I’m
not sure why he wasn’t prepared with a still image to show because someone
should have anticipated the question.
|Scott Bray attempting to point out the UAP in the video.|
second video was of a triangular-shaped object that we were told had been
captured by using night vision goggles and a camera on two occasions in widely
separated events. They explained, rather poorly I thought, that this image was
an artifact generated by the use of the two electronic devices, the night
vision goggles and a digital camera. I had reported on this months ago which
included a YouTube video made of triangular-shaped object focused on a light source
using night vision and a digital camera. In other words, we had the explanation
months ago and I wonder why this was brought up at the hearing other than to
suggest a terrestrial explanation. You can read my report on this here:
for those who don’t wish to read that report, you can find the video of that
experiment and explanation here:
point is that we amateurs in the UFO field, along with those interested in
finding answers, knew this already. You have to wonder, again, why these videos
were the ones used at the hearings.
will repeat here that we were warned about national security implications more
than once, and, of course, about the hazards to our aircraft. Moultrie and Bray
were asked if there had ever been a collision between one of these objects and
one of our fighters. There had not, but there had been eleven close calls but
we got no details about those incidents.
in the days of Project Blue Book, we learned that if a sighting had not been “officially”
brought to the attention of Blue Book, it was pretty well ignored. We learn
that there is a similar limiting factor here. That means that if it is not
officially brought to the attention AIMSOG (I don’t really know if this is the
correct way to display the acronym, but it’s the phonetic way of spelling it), then
it will probably be ignored. It seems, based on what I heard, that the official
reports are going to be restricted to military and government entities. Those
made by civilians might simply be ignored. That lets them control the data and
the narrative, which flies in the face of transparency.
fact, at one point, they were talking about open-source reports, meaning those
from the local news, magazines, Internet, civilian organizations and outside
government secure channels, will not make it into their data base. Ed Ruppelt,
back in 1951, as he reorganized Project Grudge, which would evolve into Project
Blue Book, subscripted to a clipping service which sent him newspaper articles
about UFOs. In this new investigation, that sort of information will be ignored.
did take a shot at “amateur” groups, meaning organizations like MUFON and Scientific
Coalition for UAP Studies. There is also a concern for individuals putting out misinformation
or disinformation that is self-serving and not “factually” based. There was a
brief discussion about creating some sort of penalty for putting out that sort
of information. I thought of the Robertson Panel of 1953 which suggested a debunking
program. We haven’t come all that far except to suggest some sort of criminal
penalty for making false UFO reports.
the only relevant questions for us here, meaning relating to alien visitation,
was asked about the Malmstrom Air Force Base incident in which ten missiles, in
their silos, were shut down as a large orange object hovered overhead. Not surprising,
neither Moultrie nor Bray knew much about it, though one confessed to have
heard rumors. For those interested in the details, you can read them here:
the end, this was about what I suspected. Very little dealing with UAPs as
extraterrestrial craft. I wonder if the creation of UAP is a way to separate
this new study from the UFO studies of the past. A way to ignore the history
because they did say that their research or interest begins in 2000. That enables
them to ignore everything that began in 1947 and dismiss the research that has
gone on before.
concentration on a national security aspect of this does negate the University
of Colorado study, known as the Condon Committee, done under the auspices of
the Air Force in the late 1960s. One of the Committee’s conclusions was that
UFOs (not UAPs) were not a threat to national security.
was one other thing that caught my attention and that was a suggestion that
there might have been some sort of RF emissions detected in relation to some of
the sightings. I thought immediately of the Levelland, Texas, sightings in
which close approach by the UFO stalled cars and filled radios with static. That
simply means there is a great deal of data available about this sort of thing,
not only in and around Levelland but around the world. In fact, there were Air Force
officers who experienced the car stalling affect of the UFO but their reports
are not part of Blue Book. All this was explained in my book cleverly titled, Levelland.
the end, they mentioned the USS Nimitz sightings that sort of sparked this
overall interest in the unexplained. They said that those sightings were
unexplained but that they weren’t necessarily non-human. Again, an attempt to
take us away from the alien and move us to some sort of technological glitch or
strange weather phenomenon or maybe a black project that they haven’t bumped
into. It all revolves around national security.
other thing was that they wanted to protect against leaks. Of course, when you
are dealing with sensitive collection methods or the ability of various sensor
arrays, you don’t want our competitors to know what we can do and see. But that
allows them to wrap the data in the mantle of national security and evade transparency.
They were telling us not to expect much in the way of information and that was
what I thought would happen.
the end we didn’t learn much of anything other than the person appointed to
head the AIMSOG has been found but not who it is. That they expect there to be multiple
answers to the questions about what is being seen and reported, which I could
have told them months ago. They expect to go where the evidence leads them, but
we’ve heard that before. If the answer is not to the liking of the person in
charge, well, then the answer is changed.
sadly, we seen all this before, beginning in 1947 and various evolutions in the
past. We are at Twining 2.0 and I suspect the ending has already been written.