Big, Red UFO Hovered over Vandenberg in 2003, Congressional Witness Testifies

Source: Big, Red UFO Hovered over Vandenberg in 2003, Congressional Witness Testifies

An excerpt of what Graves testified to…

“A large group of Boeing contractors were operating near one of the launch facilities at Vandenberg Air Force Base when they observed a very large, 100-yard-sided red square approach the base from the ocean and hover at low altitude over one of the launch facilities,” said Ryan Graves, a former U.S. Navy fighter jet pilot and founder of a nonprofit focused on UAP sightings. “This object remained for about 45 seconds or so before darting off over the mountains,” he continued.

Graves, the executive director of Americans for Safe Aerospace, said the sighting occurred around 8:45 a.m., followed by a second sighting only hours later. He said witnesses provided him with information about the mysterious incidents, as they had held onto “official documentation and records” from the event over the years. “Later in the evening, post sunset, there were reports of other sightings on base, including some aggressive behaviors. These objects were approaching some of the security guards at rapid speeds before darting off,” Graves said.

Let me preface by saying….technically….. Graves is a secondhand witness…….he never personally had his own eyes on any of the objects he described…..unlike Fravor who is a firsthand witness….and did see the Tic-Tac with his own eyes…

So Graves tells of this Vandenburg sighting…….and it’s secondhand heresy at best.

Where’s the doc’s for that?

It’s the first time I hear of it…..new news to me OK…..but is there anything else on the www that can be more specific? Like firsthand testimonies of the Boeing contractors?? etc…

If so, kindly enlighten me and possibly others.

It’s a fascinating story……told by a popular guy….Graves.

But where’s the PROOF?

Jus sayin….

Graves is popular…..but he, like others, have Squat!

He showed nothing… not even circumstantial proof, at best to the congressional table.

He’s a civilian now….he could have exposed any “proof”, pictures, material, etc. at the hearing table….from those witnesses of military, and commercial, and private pilots that have engaged him and his organization ASA…but again Squat!

Why should his organization hold back what they’ve been told by or given locked away?…imo.

I’m willing to bet that commercial pilots….. and for sure private pilots…. are not beholden to NDA’s. Where’s the proof they could have shared with Graves?

And if Graves’s organization makes those that come to him and ASA sign NDA’s…….then WHY?

What’s the point of telling your story to an organization that isn’t transparent enough to when the opportunity arises at a public forum like a congressional hearing, should spill the beans. Once again WHY?

This whole affair…..all of it…is beginning to slightly look nefarious…..my gut feeling.

👽

So you believe Graves is a lying

Generally here's how I feel about this, the DoD will stonewall, delay, deflect, and discredit till the public finds something else to chew on. all they have to do is weather the storm, say it's ridiculous, and say they have no evidence.

Ask yourself this has the DoD or any security or intelligence agency ever lied to the American public

Because if the CT people that have been waiting for decades for answers can't wait to see where this goes after 1 week, and are already started discrediting the witnesses, and have their attention span starting to wander already. The DoD and whoever wants this to remain secret have already won.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

And if Graves’s organization makes those that come to him and ASA sign NDA’s…….then WHY?

i would hazard to guess just like greer seeking fame and fortune. it's not unheard of crooks running non profits.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

This whole affair…..all of it…is beginning to slightly look nefarious…..my gut feeling.

Well, let’s summarize it all briefly:

Graves encounter (that he didn’t see himself) was 20 years ago.

Fravor’s encounter was 19 years ago.

Grusch never had any encounters, and doesn’t even have a photo to back up his claims.

This is the best that congress could come up with, after all these years, and plenty of first hand encounters from individuals?

And yeah, a 300 foot red cube seems quite fantastical.

Fravor appeared to be the only honest one out of the lot. Ironically, he only came forward because a buddy pestered him to do so. Now, it’s clear he’s having fun with all the attention…

a reply to: KKLOCO

You got it….

👍🏼🍻

👽

a reply to: putnam6

On the contrary…..he doesn’t believe he’s lying by the stories that were told to him….but isn’t that the same sentiments of Grusch? Grusch has been told stories that “he” believes is true….so in his mind, what he says is true. Same for graves.

No doubt graves saw craft or something on his cockpit displays. I believe that to be true.

So ….no….I don’t think graves is lying…..I just think that through his organization and it’s mission….he could have been forthcoming about what his organization's ‘proof’ is up until this point in time.

👽

I honesty can't see why anyone is excited over this at all. There has been nothing new as far as proof at all in any of it. Oh well, 20 yrs ago I was told.......yeah that's so important and convincing.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I wasn't going to reply but a thought occurred to me that I find somewhat interesting.

Graves, yea, a second hand witness........but where's the MSM on this? Have they even touched upon any of this? I scoured the MSM a few days ago and saw absolutely no mention of it anywhere.

You realize I'm sure that for the most part, the public and the "Government" dont believe 1st hand accounts of UFO sightings, much less second hand one's which points to a "why" the MSM doesn't touch the subject......they don't intend to lend it any credibility. In the plebs minds, if CNN didn't discuss it......it didnt happen. And of course, the MSM is controlled by The Party which gives a hint as to where "The Party" is going with all this. Nowhere.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: putnam6

On the contrary…..he doesn’t believe he’s lying by the stories that were told to him….but isn’t that the same sentiments of Grusch? Grusch has been told stories that “he” believes is true….so in his mind, what he says is true. Same for graves.

Given Grusch's track record / reputation and the type of work he was doing when he heard the things he heard, IMO there are just a couple of options:


* He is a sensationalist, a guy looking for attention and willing to lie to get it. Hardly, I'd say, given what he risks and the lawyer that took the case, and foresaid reputation.

* He was lied to by all the people he spoke with, whom all told him similar lies. Might be, they simply may have hated that "mr perfect" guy and all decided to pull one on him. But that in itself would be a good reason to have a Congressional hearing: folks with high clearances that intentionally lie to a guy that is tasked to obtain information on a formal mission, in the line of duty. Hardly again.

* He is a mole, a guy with a mission. That may well be to discredit the entire thing once and for all. Or seek out other whistleblowers. Or keep the secret services of foreign nations busy. Whatever. Seems quite plausible to me actually, has been done before.

* He is mentally ill. His body language is strange, for sure, so who knows. But given his track record and the work he has been doing, and his lawyer - hardly, again.

*It is mostly true. IMO not very plausible, but I'm a fence sitter here. After all, flying saucers are now formally acknowledged by the DoD (albeit now under their new name UAP's).

My money is on the mole-option. But I sure hope to be proven wrong.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: putnam6

On the contrary…..he doesn’t believe he’s lying by the stories that were told to him….but isn’t that the same sentiments of Grusch? Grusch has been told stories that “he” believes is true….so in his mind, what he says is true. Same for graves.

Given Grusch's track record / reputation and the type of work he was doing when he heard the things he heard, IMO there are just a couple of options:


* He is a sensationalist, a guy looking for attention and willing to lie to get it. Hardly, I'd say, given what he risks and the lawyer that took the case, and foresaid reputation.

* He was lied to by all the people he spoke with, whom all told him similar lies. Might be, they simply may have hated that "mr perfect" guy and all decided to pull one on him. But that in itself would be a good reason to have a Congressional hearing: folks with high clearances that intentionally lie to a guy that is tasked to obtain information on a formal mission, in the line of duty. Hardly again.

* He is a mole, a guy with a mission. That may well be to discredit the entire thing once and for all. Or seek out other whistleblowers. Or keep the secret services of foreign nations busy. Whatever. Seems quite plausible to me actually, has been done before.

* He is mentally ill. His body language is strange, for sure, so who knows. But given his track record and the work he has been doing, and his lawyer - hardly, again.

*It is mostly true. IMO not very plausible, but I'm a fence sitter here. After all, flying saucers are now formally acknowledged by the DoD (albeit now under their new name UAP's).

My money is on the mole-option. But I sure hope to be proven wrong.

This is where I'm coming from, it's too early to tell what is going to happen one way or another.

This is just the start, they still are having issues getting into a SCIF, be patient, we will see. If true, these are secrets that have been hidden for decades 70-80 years and we want it answered in a week or a month.

as for other comments here

Who cares what happen in another Congressional hearing, it's DC, if there was any validity to it then, it could have been squashed by the DoD or other leaders with Defense Department connections. Not to mention Congress could have had other more pertinent business or certain members were friendly with the DoD and didn't push the issue, as Burchett, Luna, Moscowitz, and others seem bent on doing.


If a Vice President can push buttons in Eastern Europe, don't you think a President or theDoD could put the kibosh on previous UFO talks ?

I’m re-posting my post from a different thread…..


👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

As I have said in another post regarding thing particular sighting,


If a ("large") contingent of Boeing contractors were on base at Vandenberg in 2003, they would have had to have been cleared by base security...isn't that why they have security gates at military bases?, and so a record of who, by name, these folks were/are should be in existence.


Pull the damn entry log...if it still exists, find out who the people are, and question them about the encounter...if any of them are still alive.


Also, the claim is that this craft was a square, 100 yards (300FT) on a side.


But I haven't seen where it is described as a "cube", specifically. Was it a cube, or, as stated "a 100 yard sided red square" (like a really big sheet of red paper?).

And where were the other witness reports from the base?

This sucker was supposedly "there", over a US air base, big, red and "in your face"....and the only people to have seen it are a bunch of contractors?

What about radar? What about other aircraft in the vicinity. What about other servicemembers?


Talk about a big "Red Flag"! regarding security at US military installations!



Order of the day:


"Keep your head down. See nothing. Say nothing."

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
I’m re-posting my post from a different thread…..

👽

Could be Grusch but I don't think so?

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Sometimes I suspect every vocally positive UFO "reporter on ATS has ulterior motives. I would be a minor one of those voices except as a UFO abductee, I support UFO intervention and work to enlighten readers about the dark ages that are obviously coming as we are forced into being a different type of humanity.

But the question asked, 'But where’s the PROOF?" is asking WHAT? ...Why?

What is the purpose of those words? To throw doubtful words upon that report which seems to include incrimination info the whole field of what the government and industries knew for a long time?

I'll leave it at that. My purpose initially was to have a good laugh because that "supposed" and suspected maybe not true report happened over Vandenberg Air Force Base.

Gen Hoyt Vandenberg was the head of the US Air Force in 1948 when he supposedly rejected the Air Force's own Air Technical Intelligence Command's "The Estimate of the Situation" in the late summer of 1948. Supposedly, as reported in Capt. Edward Ruppelt's The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects, Vandenberg said that he could not commence with a national policy about the phenomena since the report offered no proof. In effect that is where the secrecy and denial offensive started against the basic truth of the whole situation. So, another laugh is involved. His rejection of the report was the first steps in a national policy toward the phenomena.

a reply to: The GUT

Posted a reply to you in the Grusch “Testimony” thread..

👽

a reply to: The GUT

GUT! You are correct…..it is NOT Grusch….your better at face recognition than I am……I should have my eyes checked. I hope the meme I made hasn’t gone viral Reddit or Twitter….😂🤣😂

👍🏼🍻

Close but no Cigar…

👽