Breaking BAASS, Assessing AATIP and Doubting Thomas ‘DeLonge’

originally posted by: beetee
I have some issues with this. It might be that I am overestimating the capabilities of the US IC, but I would think that if they really wanted us to "think aliens are visiting earth" they could scrounge up some better evidence than what has been served so far. Even if they had to fake it.

Unless the point is to create some kind of "grey area" where aliens may exist...

"Muddy the waters" is a phrase John Greenewald has used to describe the situation. It's not a full frontal assault to try to convince us aliens are visiting, we get conflicting accounts and the appearance of a battle that might suggest the government is hiding something, but the "whistleblower" Elizondo is working against the government, like in this little episode of apparent conflict:

Evidence of U.S. Navy Involvement in UFO Program May Have Been Destroyed

The Black Vault reached out to Elizondo for another response and reaction. His comments are published here, in full and unedited, to ensure his voice is heard on the matter:

“I’m greatly disappointed but not surprised. When the U.S. Government’s last resort is to refer to a single sourced opinion article, you know their position is getting desperate. This response is clearly a vindictive effort by some in the Pentagon to inflict retribution on myself and others for speaking the truth to the American people. It’s a failure for any real journalist to not recognize this is the eighth time the government has changed their position on this matter in the last three years; even contradicting their previous official statements...

So, according to Elizondo, he's telling the truth, but the Pentagon has told us 8 different versions of the "truth", none of which agree with what he says, so that's nine different stories. You can pick which one you want to believe. I choose to doubt all of them.

Regarding Elizondo's borrowing Giorgio Tsoukalos' meme that "I"m not sying it's aliens, but...it's aliens", here's an example of Elizondo's language which seems to fit:

Report does not confirm, or rule out, extraterrestrial activity in unexplained aerial events

“Wherever these technologies come from, they are clearly far more advanced than any earthly technology known to our intelligence services,” if reporting on the impending report is accurate, (Elizondo) said.

So he didn't say they were alien, but, what does that imply? So you've got Elizondo coming at it from that angle, and you have the pentagon contradicting not only themselves but also Elizondo's claims, again muddying the waters. You can pick your belief. Want to believe Elizondo? You can. Want to believe the Pentagon? That's a little harder when they contradict themselves, but you could pick one of their 8 stories to believe, whichever is your favorite.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yes, there is certainly a great muddying going on. And a lot of double speak.

It seems to be aimed mainly at the US public.

I still struggle to see the overall purpose here, but Mellon (that allegedly kept all the secrets) and Elizondo seem to be the two main characters presently.

I wonder how McCasland and Weiss managed to do such a spectacular disappearing act after setting all this in motion with Mr. DeLonge.

a reply to: beetee

It seems to be aimed mainly at the US public.

Absolutely. Although the Nimitz incident and UAPTF has been reported elsewhere. No one else's military appears to be reporting these things publicly. Nor does there seem much concern.

I wonder how McCasland and Weiss managed to do such a spectacular disappearing act after setting all this in motion with Mr. DeLonge.

Do we actually know how much these two characters were involved? We never saw any response to Delonge did we?

However it's ground journalists won't tread. Not even a "no comment" from anyone.

Social media twits ignore it or change the subject for those brave enough to bring it up.

But then no one seems to ask Bigelow where his UFO warehouse, built with taxpayer money, is? Or what he does with all his information he's collated down the years.

Or why TTSA needed neuroscience, counter biological weapons, brain injuries and a Biomedical Attorney on it's board?



Then of course there's the original leak of the FLIR video in 2007. Supposedly ufologists tracked and spoke to the source. But the US government showed absolutely no concern at all about it.

a reply to: mirageman

We have this, from Mr Delonge to Podesta, albeit pharaphrased:

General’s thoughts: "I was thinking a bit more about what a White House memo should say. Something like these points to all Federal Agencies: - In light of the President's policy on STEM (citing official policy encouraging the study of science, technology, engineering and math) - some back ground on your project - the Administration encourages a favorable Public Affairs position by all Agencies - appointes NASA to lead (this kind of public outreach is in NASA's job jar, and if no Agency is appointed all will simply note and file the memo and likely do nothing) - and to coordinate with DoD, DNI and NOAA (the other major space actors, putting a bit of light on them)”

Also, DeLonge claims that Weiss had been asking about progress, as Podesta seemed to be slow to respond:

Mr. Weiss from Lockheed SkunkWorks just emailed me asking if there were any updates. I am not expecting much, but if there is anything I can tell him and the General, however small, I would like to respectfully pass it along.

We know there was a google hangouts meeting that Carey, McCasland, Weiss and Podesta participated in- seemingly.

We also know they melted away like snow in spring the moment their names became public, and an altogether different cast of characters moved in to fill the void.

I don't know if you remember, but Mr. DeLonge had quite a fit of panic on social media after the leak, until he could finally inform us that the project would be moving forward. But, in retrospect, with perhaps other helpers than before?

Semivan, Kelleher, Knapp and at the last moment, Elizondo.

Maybe this is why UAPs need to be restricted to 2004 and later and have to come in from the cold:

www.thedrive.com...

Apologize if this has been posted before.
Makes perfect sense to me, at least.

Strange objects in restricted areas not being reported or acted upon due to stigma. Enterprising adversaries taking advantage of this self inflicted blind spot with disposable, cheap technology.

Pretty amazing.

a reply to: beetee

Yes, we've touched upon the possibility that some low tech methods were being employed to spy on US military hardware and infrastructure way back somewhere.

It possibly comes back to the old DD1910 release form.



UAV, Balloons and other UAS...

But it's a strange way of going about solving the issue.

a reply to: beetee

It's also interesting that the ODNI released this statement not long after the report was published. Concerns were voiced ....

....Incursions into our training ranges and designated airspace pose safety of flight and operations security concerns, and may pose national security challenges. DOD takes reports of incursions – by any aerial object, identified or unidentified – very seriously, and investigates each one....

The report submitted today highlights the challenges associated with assessing UAP occurring on or near DOD training ranges and installations. The report also identified the need to make improvements in processes, policies, technologies, and training to improve our ability to understand UAP....

The statement about taking reports of incursions "very seriously" seems to contradict the claim from the likes of Zondo that America's military actually doesn't and ignores them completely. For up to 17 years.

Cognitive dissonance yet again!

a reply to: mirageman

Well, perhaps not so strange if the fear is that pilots or their superiors have neglected to report weird things due to stigma?

These cubes inside spheres, which might very well be radar reflectors, for example.

Add a little e-war wizardry, some miniature drones that can disappear in the blink of an eye and then add the fear of ridicule or worse and you might very well have something workable if you were an adversary wanting to interrogate US defence systems.

One logical step in patching that blind spot would perhaps be to make very sure that all odd things are reported and investigated in the future. To achieve that, the stigma has to go away to a certain degree. And, look and behold, that is what we are seeing.

It would also make sense that this should be a counterintelligence operation, if this is indeed the underlying motivation for this half-hearted "disclosure".

If I remember correctly, this was one of the original concerns of the CIA back when they decided to squash the UFO issue, that adversaries might seek to exploit it, but instead they have perhaps exploited the US policy of neglecting, abusing and ridiculing the whole thing?

This is the only explanation I have come across so far that makes any kind of sense as to what we are seeing.

I think also this is very embarrasing for a lot of people, particularly those who have done their best to make ufology the sordid mess that it is, not realizing that what they have exploited for their own purposes might also be exploited by others.

It does little to answer what our more puzzling cases from the past might have been, but kt certainly explains why the policy of neglect has suddenly been binned with terrible haste.

Anyway, this is hardly the whole story, but I'm willing to bet it is part of it.

More stuff on Zondo etc.

ufotrail.blogspot.com... Q

originally posted by: beetee
If I remember correctly, this was one of the original concerns of the CIA back when they decided to squash the UFO issue, that adversaries might seek to exploit it, but instead they have perhaps exploited the US policy of neglecting, abusing and ridiculing the whole thing?

This is the only explanation I have come across so far that makes any kind of sense as to what we are seeing.

I think also this is very embarrasing for a lot of people, particularly those who have done their best to make ufology the sordid mess that it is, not realizing that what they have exploited for their own purposes might also be exploited by others.

Do you think that those involved in such exploitation feel embarrassed about what they do, that they are even capable of embarrassment? Do you think someone like, say Richard Helms, went to his grave tortured by his actions in service or do you think he continued to believe that what he did, he did in the best interests of his country? It is not the be-suited, desk-bound, paper pushing, decision makers that suffer the consequences of their actions, it's the boys and girls on the ground suffering the PTSD.

The Pentagon report distances itself from the dirty-tricks played against it's own people in pursuit of a cold war, in denial of Atomic weapons testing, and all sorts of other dirty but pretty much out in the open secrets by focusing purely on a specific sub-set of sightings. If, as you suggest, the objective of the report was to address the "threat" posed by UAP misreporting or none-reporting due to expectations of ridicule, I would say they have succeeded but they've used manipulative tactics to do so. Same old, same old. They treat their people like morons and given the lack of investment in education they obviously like it that way. Magical beliefs rule in the US, combine that with a biblically focused education that distrusts science and you have yourself a nation of rubes, ripe for fleecing.

The Pentagon is competeing with the education system for government money and for the heart's and mind of the young.

a reply to: KilgoreTrout

I have no illusions as to the moral fortitude of people such as Richard Helms. I do think they, after a fashion, did what they thought was in the best intrest of the country at large, even if it ment "sacrificing" both the well being and even the lives of some innocents along the way.

Not much different from today, really. The Pentagon cares but little if a few afghan weddings are blown to bits if there is a slight chance some suspected isurgent get blow to bits with the rest.

And if it later turns out there was a small intelligence failure, I think they shrug it of as inevitable and move right on.

What I ment by embarrasment is the, I suspect for such people, much worse professional embarrasment of being outplayed at their own game of smoke and mirrors by a cunning opponent. Using such high tech devices as balloons and radar reflectors to tease out valuable data from state of the art US radar systems. And doing it for years because the intelligence people have made such a sordid mess of the whole UFO thing that both pilots and higer-ups are reluctant to even mention such unidentified objects. I think, for the intelligence people, and especially the counterintelligence people, this is a massive failure and a terrible professional embarrasment.

So they are left with a conundrum of making sure people actually begin to report, and talk about, such "strange" sightings, but also having to somehow not admit all they have been doing for the last 70 years. So, akwardly, they are trying to gloss over the past and pretend the UAPs are somehow different from UFOs, and thus, as you say, not having to answer for some highly dubious actions and policies of the past.

Someone has decided that the stigma must be rolled back, and they are trying to do it without having to own up to the past 50 years or more of shenanigans.

I also think this is why the Navy, and not the USAF is so prominent this time around, because the USAF leads straight into Bluebook and AFOSI, which nobody particularly wants to focus on, while the Navy have fewer such negative connotations.

I cannot prove any of this, of course, but it makes more sense to me than any "change of heart" or "disclosure".

www.reddit.com...

A redditor recalls a lecture by Elizondo... on disinformation and bio-defence...

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
More stuff on Zondo etc.

ufotrail.blogspot.com... Q

That's interesting. When we heard that Elizondo's e-mails were deleted, my first thought was that communication is usually two-way. So whatever parties Elizondo was e-mailing would have sent their replies and if those haven't been deleted then some records of Elizondo's e-mails would exist in the mailboxes of those he corresponded with.

Since DIA was in charge of AATIP, and they are not saying the DIA's e-mails were deleted, if they can't find any correspondence with Elizondo in those DIA e-mails, it's really looking bad for Elizondo. His credibility could possibly survive his own e-mails being deleted (for some people), but I don't see how it can survive this, how could he take over the program in 2010 with no correspondence?

The DIA was credited with launching the AATIP in 2007. The project reportedly transferred to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in 2010, and was shelved in 2012.

It will be interesting to see what kind of response he comes up with.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

It will be interesting to see what kind of response he comes up with.

Won't it just.

originally posted by: beetee
www.reddit.com...

A redditor recalls a lecture by Elizondo... on disinformation and bio-defence...

It's certainly interesting if true. Yet I see a lot of comments dismissing it as irrelevant to what he is saying in the current day. Many people can't see beyond UFOs. But what we can see is how, since 2017, ufology has been hijacked by "Information Warfare" professionals, chosen 'journalists' and social media influencers lower down the food chain.

Elizondo is a former counter-intelligence operative! Mellon is a Professor of Information Warfare who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Intelligence during the 'WMD in Iraq' intelligence failure. Their arch nemesis is Pentagon spokesperson Sue Gough has, coincidentally, contributed to papers on psychological warfare herself.

Then lower down we had Knapp heading up "...a secondary advisory group". Promoting DeLonge's almost insane rambling long before Oct 2017. He was the guy who got exclusive interviews with Elizondo and Reid and the man who leaked various documents [likely provided by Elizondo or BAASS]. Knapp also provides information to social media twits in closed social media groups. There's others who have appeared on the scene that we all know too.

So one thing we may be seeing here is how a fringe topic like ufology is used as a psychological test bed. To see how easily people are influenced by statements from various levels of 'authority'. From low level bloggers and Twitterers, all the way up to Pentagon representatives and politicians. A way ofmeasuring how belief systems are maintained or countered and what really doesn't stick depending on the who and how it's being delivered.

Remember, one of Tom's 'selling points' was supposedly

"...changing the cynical views of youth towards government."

I’m not saying that's the only objective after four years. But it could explain why digging into the fine details reveals contradictions and fallacies, and why certain people are leading the choir and others singing from their hymn sheet.

originally posted by: beetee
What I ment by embarrasment is the, I suspect for such people, much worse professional embarrasment of being outplayed at their own game of smoke and mirrors by a cunning opponent. Using such high tech devices as balloons and radar reflectors to tease out valuable data from state of the art US radar systems. And doing it for years because the intelligence people have made such a sordid mess of the whole UFO thing that both pilots and higer-ups are reluctant to even mention such unidentified objects. I think, for the intelligence people, and especially the counterintelligence people, this is a massive failure and a terrible professional embarrasment.

Of course we can only operate from certain assumptions because we are in an opaque area of study, if indeed, in this context study is even the right word because I am not entirely sure what it is that they were or are studying or think they are studying. Some of your assumptions differ greatly from mine. I don't see any threat represented by the objects themselves, the potential for threat rests in their misidentification as hostile objects IMO, possibly. But I can see other ways, psychologically, where a belief in UFOs could also be a weakness that could be exploited by enemies of the state or the such-like. Nothing though has been presented, that I am aware of, that supports the notion that these objects are in and of themselves threatening, but obviously a passive response to a light that could be an enemy-drone, would be a security issue - but there is nothing to support that that is what we are seeing with the Tic-tac stuff...mylar balloons etc, that have so far been proffered to support this notion of "threat" so I'm assuming again that there is a more abstract interpretation. In short, I don't think, in that respect at least, that any of the previous studies got that "wrong", and indeed, a number of those reports recommended that programmes be instituted in identification of UFO/UAPs which weren't carried out. Which is where I would suppose the embarassment to lie because of where "we" are as a consequence of the matter not being addressed sooner and in effect the opposite happening. Belief in UFOs and ETs was actively, or so it would seem, encouraged as a means of concealing all manner of other illegal activities.

And more confusion generated about exactly what role Zondo played within AATIP.

The AATIP was managed by the Defense Intelligence Agency from 2008 until it ended in 2012, a Government Information Specialist from the Office of the Secretary of Defense stated in an email received Wednesday....

...Elizondo and his associates have repeatedly claimed he directed the AATIP, and have specifically stated his directorship began in 2010 from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, or OUSDI.[

Mr. Hartwick further stated, "The AATIP was managed by DIA from 2008 until it ended in 2012."

Office of Secretary of Defense: DIA Ran AATIP Until It Ended in 2012

I wonder how that complaint to the IG is coming along?

a reply to: mirageman

Seems like there's so much BS in all this it's hard to keep up.

a reply to: mirageman

Thanks for all the info