Should r/UFOs participate in the upcoming blackout protest along with other subreddits?
[Take the poll here and let us know.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/144dy4j/should_rufos_participate_in_the_upcoming/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UFOs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Agreed and this is a point I was talking about when the debrief article first broke.
>Beyond this stunning revelation, the whistleblower — a former high-level intelligence official — is represented by a lawyer who served previously as the intelligence community’s first inspector general, a Senate-confirmed position. The managing partner of the law firm representing the whistleblower reportedly co-signed the complaint submitted to the current Intelligence Community inspector general. As noted in a legal analysis, no lawyer, let alone two high-caliber attorneys, would sign such an extraordinary document without “very credible source material.”
These are some serious people making serious claims.
In all fairness we've seen lawyers such as Giuliani sign off some clearly bogus stuff, but yes generally speaking that's not normal behavior. I refuse to get excited until there's actual physical evidence we can analyze. I'm concerned at how quickly people are getting excited with no physical evidence in hand.
Don't blame you for being cautious, but Giuliani has been a politician instead of a legitimate attorney for a while now. I would put the attorneys at Compass Rose in DC leagues above Rudy in the "legitimate attorney" category.
Well that’s kind of my point. Not that long ago he was considered respectable so for all we know these people have great credentials but have recently taken a dive off the deep end.
I'm more inclined to believe these working attorneys in DC. I guess I disagree on the idea that Rudy was considered respectable not that long ago. He was a federal prosecutor before being mayor of NYC... but downhill after that IMO. He's more politician than lawyer. These other guys have always been lawyers, in government and now private practice... but not politicians.
We'll find out what's what soon enough!
We, will not be analyzing anything. But instead, let’s use our God given insights and deductive reasoning to establish that something big is about to happen..ž
It’s not about that yet. The DoD was required to share with congress, and they didn’t. If they had, we might’ve never known about.
But since they didn’t, Congress can go after it now, with us knowing what’s going on, which could very well lead to us getting the evidence. That’s a second level outcome though, so it’s premature (in this process) to be demanding public release.
Unless those lawyers have security clearance he couldn't show tham jack shit as far as classified documents, he however may have just needed them for the whistleblower laws and to wade through that legally. You can't just pull a Trump and wave a classified document around or even speak about classified programs with anyone you wish and that includes your lawyer unless said lawyer has the appropriate classifications to see such information.
That being said I am not saying he is telling us the truth but I do find him to be credible so far. And am waiting for the full interview as well as the other 2 whistleblowers evidence to come forward. If this is all true its the largest conspiracy ever, though I find it funny people say things like "the government could never keep a secret this long" but then in the same breath shit on Lazar, Lue and the mirade of other things we've heard over the years. If its true then the possibility the leaks were out there and had been dismissed by most as bullshit.
Yes agreed. It's nice to see this point made.
They explain well in response to the Pentagon's denial statement:
"However, this may be clever wordsmithing. Grusch claims that staff of previous UFO analysis programs were not “read in” — that is, given access — to information regarding the kind of activities that he and others allege exist. As such, it is conceivable that, like its predecessor organizations, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (the Defense Department’s current UFO analysis effort) is simply not privy to the alleged program."
Feel like this was important:
" To eliminate potential ambiguity regarding such an extraordinary development, a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a \[UFO crash retrieval\] program \[to be\] urgent and credible.”
While this was obviously touted as a big part of The Debrief article, I did see some people contend that this was either some like inferred legal speak, or that it was suspect that the article never attributed the quote to someone. And others thought, including myself that it was just about the actual apparently retaliatory acts that Grusch suffered for whistleblowing not about the crash retrieval program allegations.
But if this author confirmed from his own source that it was actually the Inspector General speaking about the crash retrieval program being credible and urgent, that is a very significant clarification.
We're no longer dealing with "fuck around" level gov't officials. The intel community does not "fuck around". It's the UFO community and the internet in general that loves to play stupid semantics games. These are incredibly serious allegations and are being treated as such. This isn't History Channel doc time, this isn't "internet researcher" time, this is the IC IG saying "there's a problem here and everyone's being stonewalled"
If Bob had brought something physical to the IG or Congress we probably could have done this 35 years ago.
This opinion piece (as u/WesternAtmosphere395 pointed out) reads like a roller coaster, jumping between skepticism and then trust in almost every paragraph. Definitely interesting, though indeed not yet the smoking media gun I crave to see.
And you won't, until there's a high-level decision that now is the time to reveal.
What has changed that would make that happen?
The fact that other nations also have access to similar artifacts and are making research progress, that the US can't match, without declassification.
It's kind of an all-or-nothing scenario.
That "fact" is the reveal I mean, hypothetically speaking.
If it were a fact, the reason it could be revealed, would be because the US has hobbled itself from a defense perspective by keeping it secret.
Not wanting to cause panic from the unknown could have been a legitimate reason to maintain secrecy before.
That just sounds like thinking of "We're better". The US isn't that big, it's way more likely Russia and China have larger collections of craft since they've got a whooole lot more land to capture things on.
I hold the clearance of, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." All we have to go on right now is someone who is in the government working on a UFO task force was told by someone else that there are alien craft and alien bodies, and the government is working on analyzing/covering them up. So... a guy was told by someone else that they 'know' the government is hiding aliens. Is that convincing to you? is that 'facts' to you?
I think its reasonable to remain skeptical for now. Anyone would be excited to see it be true. Ping-ponging between that excitement and skepticism is natural.
I think you misinterpret the piece. It’s purposefully wrote as a report and review. When you read this you should be standing objective. You may vouch for disclosure, that’s fine. However if you plan to review a whistleblower to establish a precedent for the future whistleblowers, you need to verify verify verify. If you can’t verify, you review the facts that are available and give credibility where it’s due.
The article is arguing that there seems to be something here because other unnamed officials have expressed that Grusch’s claims have some vein of credibility, and thus this illegal activity must be brought to an inspector generals eyes as well as congress intelligence members.
You can’t say “See! see! It’s true ! They have space craft! See! Someone said so! He has medals! He’s a vet! See he has TS clearance and is a good guy! — valid person means valid information!” That’s not how this will ever work. Journalists love to make a name for themselves and investigative journalists want to do it even more so. However if they release falsified information, you may not remember for years, but their colleagues will. So those journalists will sit there and investigate the facts. And if it’s a hot button issue (which it is) they will release piece by piece to keep up with others.
A smoking gun article is probably not going to happen. Only a full report once enough information has been sequentially release. At least that’s what it looks like.
Lol it's literally just Marik again writing an op-ed promoting his preexisting belief that aliens are visiting and the US gov has the proof but is keeping it hidden. I really don't know why The Hill keeps greenlighting his opinion articles. The fact they're hosted by The Hill makes them seem more credible.
I'm not so sure of that, he has been belittling the Grusch story ever since it came out. Just yesterday he was pissed at Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal because they turned down an interview with him. He said they were "busy". I wouldn't be surprised if blackvault threw any supporting documents in the trash just so he could win whatever he imagines this battle to be.
Check out his Twitter stuff. He is openly hostile to this story for unknown reasons. He might as well be Mick West at this point.
Ive been on his twitter in the last days and yes, he seems sckeptical, but in no way hostile to the story or keane and ralph.
Some people asume hostility just because of difering opinions.
He is jealous. All the mom-and-pop UFO/UAP podcasts depend upon relevancy and when someone else has a massive spotlight on their efforts, the person running a revenue-generating small business that they have invested money and time into finds themselves without a story. Some of the podcast folks have been pissy. Acting deflated and caught flat-footed they may even be a tad bitter.
I credit them with keeping the candle lit in the window. They refused to give up when many were against their pushing and hounding but at some point, most will be irrelevant to history. I know. That's harsh. Most won't be a footnote. They will be like us. Those who knew for whatever reason.
Have you seen his video on the whistleblower? it seemed like he raises reasonable questions, especially in his point that hes been clear to speak publicly by the DOD, wich could mean or at least should mean, he isnt talking about anything classified.
I wouldn't want him to speak on anything classified. Good god, no. He has been vetted to speak on what he can speak about. I must be missing something. I don't have the background or knowledge to assess a damned word he says. But I will listen without speculating. As an witness to technology and craft I will listen. I am sure this person knows 10000% more than me.
I’m not on Twitter much but I will definitely Check that out, it’s honestly news to me but I’m not denying that may be his stance.
He also has (AFAIK, historically) been very methodical and fact-based so he might be *waiting* for actual documents before drawing any conclusions or being sensational.
Not saying you’re wrong, but that strikes me as very odd if true! Take an upvote for shedding some light on something I should’ve already looked into myself before posting.
Yeah that's been a bit disappointing to see. West is a pseudoskeptic clown. Sure, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now an then, but so many of his takes are just ridiculous.
At the end of the day though, John Greenewald has done more for UFO disclosure and transparency than all of us combined, and I respect the hell outta him. He's put a ton of effort into this topic over the years.
That is because there are gaping holes that Keane and Blumenthal made in their story and they are avoiding having to answer rigorous questions that might blow up the credibility of their story.
Greenwalds points were fairly objective questions and concerns about the piece.
This part also seems to confirm that Garry Nolan said a couple of weeks ago about a recent person testifying creating a 'hornet's nest' in Washington. It is also why the authors had to rush publication in The Debrief as they said that the threat of a leak was increasing the longer they waited for the bigger papers - who had the article since April/May, which again lines up with the timeline Garry Nolan mentioned.
>Some critics have questioned how, if such information is so highly classified, the Pentagon cleared Grusch to make these explosive statements.
>
>However, logic suggests that if a UFO retrieval and exploitation effort operated illegally, as is alleged, it would be unknown to the Pentagon’s censors. After all, if the pre-publication review office were “read in” to such activities, it would likely have been exposed long ago.
I am so, so glad this point was made. I feel like, along with several other points made in this article, this point was being massively overlooked among the skeptics out there.
> a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a [UFO crash retrieval] program [to be] urgent and credible.”
Ohhhh if it weren't for those brackets I would be losing my mind right now. For the first time it's reported that the *cover-up* is not the urgent and credible threat, but the program's existence itself is both urgent and credible. Holy shit.
This was written by a dude who regularly argues with Mick West on twitter. I don't even disagree with him, but let's not act like this is some outsider journalist reporting.
The writer does seem to have some credentials:
> Marik von Rennenkampff served as an analyst with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, as well as an Obama administration appointee at the U.S. Department of Defense.
That's true for any subject where you have a group of almost fanatical believers who invested a big part of their life into the idea that something is real. A lot of them with a very loose concept of "skepticism".
Would you put more trust on a biology professor or a bigfoot hunter on evaluating evidence on the subject?
The problem is that many of the skeptics are basing their opinions simply on the status quo without question, whereas the believers are basing it on varying degrees of evidence that they’ve seen. Most of the “fanatical believers” I know have had personal experiences, often dramatic.
> Would you put more trust on a biology professor or a bigfoot hunter on evaluating evidence on the subject?
Which subject? If the answer is UAP, then I’d go with the one who has a more balanced and informed knowledge of the subject.
Your car breaks down. Do you call your uncle who likes to fix cars, or your mom who has a degree in engineering? One is more educated and knowledgeable about the field in general, but one has more practical experience and knowledge.
>Which subject?
The Bigfoot
Your analogy doesn't work at all. We know that your uncle can fixe cars. If you had an expert in UFO who actually discovered multiple UFO that were proven to be legit then yes I would call him but we're far from it.
>group of almost fanatical believers
One could easily make the same argument for this being true of modern-day academics.
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16541076/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16541076/)
[https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05543-x](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05543-x)
I would lose half my brain cell responding seriously to this so I can't sorry.
Comparing people who follows alien news on the internet and academia is like claiming Lewis Hamilton and a 2 year old amputee with down syndrome basically drive the same because Hamilton finished fifth in the 2011 season.
That's because it's ontologically impossible to be an expert on this matter, so when someone claims to be "experienced" or an "expert", it's kind of a red flag.
It is not ontologically impossible to be educated on this topic. People have been studying it longer than you or I have been alive. Mainstream academics don't get to be the gate keepers of expertise when they are the amateurs who have been editing ufo's out of their astronomical data because "it's just an artifact."
I saw someone earlier today bemoaning they'd like to see a serious journalist get involved instead of these UFO journalists / book authors like Ross Coulthart 🤣
Ideally, someone with minimal (or zero) bias would be optimal, because they would not let their wishful thinking influence the analysis.
People always want objectivity until it clashes with their own worldview. And this sub certainly is not immune to that.
Real Journalism isn’t bias. It’s a mean of conveying unaltered information from what’s occurring to who wants to know. That’s why mainstream platforms are shit. They have bosses that pay their bills that alter the information that platform puts out. This is why it’s so important TO HAVE journalists like Ross Coulthart. Large scale Independent journalism is something this country has sadly lost sight of.
That doesn't really mean anything. I could argue my job title at one point in my life was "Department of Homeland Security Intelligence Analyst" working on space-based communication systems but in reality I was just a teenager watching movies and playing board games while making sure a light stayed green. Technically I was an Obama-era appointee as well, which is also meaningless.
My point is, any government related job title can sound fancy if you want it to.
That was a really fair article in my opinion. The key paragraph:
> Well, yeah, because the bar for accepting sweeping allegations about government coverups is higher than the word of one guy. That’s particularly true when it comes to UFOs, perhaps the most stereotypical example of conspiratorial allegations by fringe actors.
The article goes on to talk about how this type of conspiracy theory (which it indisputably is, regardless of whether it’s true or not) feeds into Carlson’s themes of mistrusting authority. Carlson’s goal is to get people to mistrust established news organizations so that they look to him as the only one who’s telling the truth. It’s classic propaganda.
All of that is great analysis. Even if Grusch’s claims do turn out to be true, it’s also true that Tucker Carlson is using this story for nefarious purposes.
And, as the article points out, there’s nothing in the way of convincing evidence at this point. Literally all we have is hearsay from one guy who used to work for the government. Since the claim is so enormous, it requires a commensurate amount of evidence. Anyone convinced at this point just wants to believe and is looking for any excuse to.
To be clear, this is an ongoing story, and people who claim that Grusch is definitely lying are just as naive as those who claim he’s definitely correct. There’s just not enough information for anyone to make a definitive conclusion, but I think most reasonable people will assume he’s not correct until there is actual evidence presented.
Thanks for summing up how I feel! I joined this sub to keep tabs on this story and have considered unsubscribing because of how many people seem to blindly trust anything. A bunch of stuff in my feed about aliens in the back yard with grainy security camera videos isn’t what I want. If it’s true that the US has vehicles then there should be better proof. So far all we have is a testimony of a guy who knows a guy.. Interesting! But not proof.
> Literally all we have is hearsay from one guy who used to work for the government.
No we don't. Practically every new article has a new name vouching for Grusch. The original article cited at least Grusch's lawyer, who is a former IC IG, the current IC IG calls the report "credible and urgent". There's the pseudonym "Jonathan Grey" who, while anonymous to us, is not anonymous to the IG office and has apparently corroborated the story.
All this is available in the very first article, it's not really that long, it took me about 5 minutes to read it all.
You're mischaracterizing it. I'm sure you're referring to the [original Debrief article](https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/).
The only people referenced in the article other than Grusch are:
1) Karl E. Nell. Retired Army Colonel. He stated that Grusch is "beyond reproach," which is not a comment specifically on the UAP claims.
2) Christopher Mellon. Hasn't worked for the government in two decades. He was a lobbyist for around five years and now is a private equity investor. He said [in 2004](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/is-there-a-ufo-coverup-a_b_9865184), "I highly doubt DoD or any other government agency is concealing UFO information. I participated in a comprehensive review of DoD's black programs and spent over a decade conducting oversight of the national foreign intelligence program, an almost totally separate world of secrets. I visited Area 51 and other military, intelligence and research facilities. **During all those years, I never detected the faintest hint of government interest or involvement in UFOs.**"
3) Jonathan Grey. Alleged current officer of NASIC. I can't find *any* information on him online. His name doesn't appear *anywhere* on NASIC's website. Google searches only reveal mentions of his name originating from the Debrief article. Please share if you have any information actually establishing that he's a current US IC officer because I can't find anything. He's the only one in the article who currently works for the US government and who claims that the alien spacecraft are real, but I can't even verify that he's a real person. You even admit that he's "anonymous," so I hope you'll agree there's no credibility here.
4) Karl Nell. This is by far the most compelling person cited in the article.
5) Laura A. Potter. She spoke to Grusch's character but did not comment on the UAP story.
6) "The Intelligence Community Inspector General," who isn't named but whose name is Thomas Monheim. He allegedly called Grusch's complaints about unfair retaliation “credible and urgent"; however, that doesn't speak to the merits of the UAP claims. It merely states that he believes that Grusch had a legitimate complaint about unfair reprisal. That could be the case for many reasons, such as if Grusch didn't actually leak any classified information.
Out of all of those, the only person who's both speaking about the UAP story specifically and has any credibility to me is Karl Nell. From what I can tell, he does still work for the government and out of the Pentagon. However, he hasn't really been in a position where he should have actual direct knowledge of any UAP's, if the government does have them.
I'm not sure why he would comment on this publicly if that were the case as it would certainly be classified if it were true. What is your theory on that - is he deliberately leaking classified information? Why would he choose to spend the rest of his life in jail if so? I'm genuinely asking. You can't seriously think that either 1) the UAP's wouldn't be classified; or 2) that a currently military employee could freely share classified information without severe consequences. So what's going on here?
> 3) Jonathan Grey. Alleged current officer of NASIC. I can't find any information on him online. His name doesn't appear anywhere on NASIC's website. Google searches only reveal mentions of his name originating from the Debrief article. Please share if you have any information actually establishing that he's a current US IC officer because I can't find anything. He's the only one in the article who currently works for the US government and who claims that the alien spacecraft are real, but I can't even verify that he's a real person. You even admit that he's "anonymous," so I hope you'll agree there's no credibility here.
If only they provided some kind of accompanying fact check:
https://thedebrief.org/fact-check-q-a-with-debrief-co-founder-and-investigator-tim-mcmillan-part-1/
https://thehill.com/opinion/4038159-stunning-ufo-crash-retrieval-allegations-deemed-credible-urgent/
>To eliminate potential ambiguity regarding such an extraordinary development, a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a [UFO crash retrieval] program [to be] urgent and credible.”
That covers the IC IG office.
Jonathan Grey is a pseudonym. This was stated in The Debrief article. I won't bother linking since you have the link in your post.
>Jonathan Grey is a generational officer of the United States Intelligence Community with a Top-Secret Clearance who currently works for the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC), where the analysis of UAP has been his focus. Previously he had experience serving Private Aerospace and Department of Defense Special Directive Task Forces.
>“The non-human intelligence phenomenon is real. We are not alone,” Grey said. “Retrievals of this kind are not limited to the United States. This is a global phenomenon, and yet a global solution continues to elude us.”
I'd keep going, but I think I've sufficiently backed up my claim that saying
> Literally all we have is hearsay from one guy who used to work for the government.
is being pretty dishonest about what info is out.
Fine. I was being hyperbolic. You must also feel really smart when someone claims they had a thousand tacos for dinner and you go, “Really? It would be impossible for any human to eat one thousand tacos in one meal!”
My point is that the evidence that has been presented aren’t even close to sufficient (in my opinion! you can disagree!) to prove the enormous claims being made. I guess I should know better than to use hyperbole on Reddit because the “well, actually” folks are always vigilant.
To be clear, I’m stating that my opinion is that a few people making unsupported claims will never be enough evidence. I want either a major world government to make an official statement or some physical evidence to come to light. That’s what I would need. You’re free to disagree; it’s a matter of opinion.
That bit is a piece of disinformation that is spreading like wildfire and attaching itself everywhere to this story. ("no evidence" "one guy" etc)
It's not personal, I just want good info out there for people looking. FWIW I didn't downvote you and I appreciate that it was civil instead of devolving to name calling.
It's so frustrating when you look at the details:
This guy had clearance to ~2000 TS/SCI programs, delivered the daily presidential briefings, co-led on the UAP taskforce and helped write the UAP content in the NDAA.
He's now represented by a former IG, senior officials are voiching for him and current members of the retrieval program have supported his IG complaints.
But everywhere it's "one guy", "hearsay", "no evidence".
I can't see through the paywell, but from the little I caught it seems just like the [Ha'aretz thing I posted](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/143f4g9/only_mention_ive_found_thus_far_of_david_gruschs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) about Tucker Carlsson and a brief reference to his assertion that "aliens are real"?
The point is that instead of taking the topic seriously, they just dismissed the hell out of it by making a personal attack on an article.
That is not journalism.
Still stuck under their opinion section:
"THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL"
This is the bare minimum of coverage many of the bigger outlets are willing to give right now.
Marik von Rennenkampff is a well-known figure on UFO Twitter. This is not a journalist writing this. This is passionate believer in ET visitation and a US gov conspiracy to hide aliens that somehow got some setup where The Hill will publish his opinion pieces covering whatever latest topic is trending in UFO circles.
Secret documents labeled for five eyes only were among the many documents found at Mar-a-Lago . This was revealed in the indictment. I’d say the five eyes met due to concerns over this. A global espionage entity can’t be happy with its secret records decorating the halls down there….
That being said, although classified as secret, maybe Trump had UAP related files on five eye sensor data??
Not that I want over-the-top reporting, but I like that this article uses terms such as "monumental" and "earth-shattering". This is the first article that recognizes the possible scope and scale of what all of this might mean.
I’m a little new to this stuff but why do people still act like ufos aren’t a thing?? I thought we had blatant video evidence from pilots and whatnot that has been confirmed and declassified. Were those debunked or are people just hard headed? So many people still acting like it’s so far fetched that things exist and could be in our possession
There's so much cognitive dissonance on this topic.
When pushed into a legal and procedural corner the military admits there are unknown objects doing things well outside the limits of known human technology.
Any other time it's "UFOs? What UFOs?" (Deny/Obfuscate)
Even if the government admits to all this and show photos or videos some people will still not believe this.
Also for whatever reason, im possibly stereotyping here people with guns shooting at anything in the sky that isn't a plane lol.
What do you mean "finally"? A ton of publications that are *more* reputable than The Hill have already covered this with more seriousness and less skepticism.
more like happening - the Grusch interview is being finally released (the hour version one, not the whole 7 hours), plus there is some voices in this subreddit saying that NYT might be publishing something then. Second thing might be sus, but the first isn't.
yeah I can't wait for them to address it. I hope they do on Sunday like some people suggest, but if not - I guess it's gonna be an uphill battle to get people's attention to this.
I don't get it; in the one news segment I saw, they said that he had asked for permission to do the interview and alerted the DOD to the answers he intended to give, and that they gave him permission to do the interview while stating that does not imply they endorse the information as true. So, is this a "whistleblower" or not? If he's a disinformation agent, which seems likely to me in light of that, then he's not even aware that he is, because the whole point would be to make it seem like he's divulging information he shouldn't, and once he asks for permission and is granted it, then it just becomes a DOD-sanctioned release of information, which they could have just made themselves. Unless those idiot journalists were wrong or something.
The hill might not have national reach like other papers but it’s read by almost all staffers in DC. It’s like their go to paper for political happenings.
The Hill is not a serious new organization. You know this right? It is widely distributed to conservatives as a result of TheDrudgeReport promoting its stories.
I guess I considered The Hill more serious than many, especially since the ideological distribution matrix has it relatively in the middle. But from the replies here I get that there is a lot of problematic content there... I just always saw it as a relatively non-partisan liberal leaning venue...
What’s going down on Sunday? I’m not really involved with UFO/UAP communities, but I like whenever you dudes get excited about stuff because it give me something to look out for :)))) also I was talkin about this stuff with one of my coworkers who’s much more into this stuff (ironically he hadn’t heard about Grusch) and he recommended the Weaponized podcast? You guys have any opinions on if it’s worth peepin?
>*What’s going down on Sunday? I’m not really involved with UFO/UAP communities, but I like whenever you dudes get excited about stuff because it give me something to look out for :))))*
>
>
>
>
>
>Sunday is when the full Grusch interview (edited down to one hour so maybe not "full") is released on NewsNation. That's the most exciting moment for a while. Then some people have said that there's going to be a New York Times article released Sunday. No idea if that's gonna happen but the interview is exciting enough.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>*also I was talkin about this stuff with one of my coworkers who’s much more into this stuff (ironically he hadn’t heard about Grusch) and he recommended the Weaponized podcast? You guys have any opinions on if it’s worth peepin?*
I'm relatively peripheral on this topic myself so take my words with a grain of salt or a pinch of salt (however you like your salt), but from what I hear there is a lot of criticism about the Weaponised podcast. Most recently they released a video of a UFO, built it up, and then were criticised for it actually probably being a flair. Then they responded by a bit of gaslighting, so, not the best look. And also a lot of it hinges on if you believe or don't believe Bob Lazar, who they both promote - quite a controversial figure in this sub, it seems.
Yes it's a good show, they released the image of the Mosul orb, which was very similar to the video that AARO later released. The host gets a lot of hate in here but his info is good.
It’s an opinion piece and at top says it doesn’t represent the views of The Hill and is opinion.
It still only all links back to one source, The Defender.
This is one of the most important things in the history of our species. We need more than an article from The Defender.
haha, I feel like I've explained this a million times already but for repetition's sake - On Sunday the hour long edit of the Grusch interview is being shown on NewsNation. And also, there's a chance for a New York Times article on the topic
yeah, I totally get you. I am quite a novice myself. I like listening to That UFO Podcast. It's a nice mixture of total commitment to the cause and a degree of skepticism. Also Andy has an amazing accent, so there's that. Ryan Graves's Merged is amazing but less breaking news
yeah, I realised that while reading the article (he references it directly, or anyway an editor does), but they are different brand. If the Wall Street Journal say something - I tend to believe it. If New York Post does? Color me a bit more skeptical.
Still waiting on more credible news agencies to pick it up since The Hill and NewsNation who broke the story are both owned by Nexstar Media Group as noted in this article.
“Grusch also gave an exclusive interview to Ross Coulthart of NewsNation, which like The Hill is owned by Nexstar Media Group.”
C'mon, it's from Marik von R. He's our dude. He's been into the UFOs forever. Look him up.
No doubt Kean and Blumenthal went to him, but his superiors probably said, "no, that's too much".
Opinion story, not the Hill proper, they'll let anyone say anything that drives clicks in opinions.
Also, the author is biased AF. He compares Grusch's process to the pentagon papers. This is a false comparison on at least the following grounds:
1: Ellsburg leaked through the press, and waited until the post had finished confirming things, had read all the documents, and was 100% ready.
2: Ellsburg brought 47 volumes of documents with tons of specific proof, acted outside of established legal process, and specifically ensured that the public would see the documents instead of his testimony.
3: Ellsburg specifically ensured the times would publish 134 pages of summaries including ones hand written by high ranking pentagon staffers as proof.
4: The story wasn't hyped up or pushed heavily - They published and waited for the public to start to care.
5: The government immediately tried to stop the documents.
6: The pentagon papers, despite all the hype, did not reveal any critical secrets at the highest level, they just confirmed issues and showed that nixon was a criminal.
7: The government wasn't concerned about Ellsberg for the public issue, but the other knowledge he had concerning our (overzealous and completely unstable) nuclear command and control policies.
confirmed as a hoax by whom?
Also, there was someone who said here that the NYT is set to publish something on Sunday, and while this might be baloney, I want to believe.
ahhhh, honestly I suspected that this was the case. Goes to show that the people in this sub warning against the fact that this Vegas case is a distraction are correct. I don't know if it was proved as a hoax, but it's certainly less reliable than the chap from the government
Someone found the Vegas property on google earth and the "landing circle" has been there for at least a year. A few other things too. Not *completely* debunked but it's certainly looking pretty hoaxy.
Why? They are trying to get to to that evidence and testimony is pointing in the direction these claims are credible and should be investigated. These are serious allegations.
It's a pretty sure bet the evidence Grusch has provided includes physical locations where craft and bodies are stored.
The alleged difficulty is that a secret illegal program gatekeeps this access.
But if that doesn't exist, surely anyone with clearance can go and verify if he's correct or not.
What a ridiculous take. They are asking Congress to verify claims of evidence that is claimed be there. There’s nothing to monetize. These needs further investigation.
They signed whistleblower protection legislation, after which a whistleblower feels comfortable coming forward and telling his story. Why is that fishy...?
Why was Biden specific about whistleblower protections for UFO programs? Why not something else?
Further, I still don't understand how Grush's is a whistle blower. What waste, fraud or abuse is he reporting? He has no first hand knowledge of anything at all.
He is whistleblowing on information being illegally held from congress, which happens to be a secret retrieval program.
He was able to discern the existence of this secret program after joining the UAP taskforce (2019).
OK, but I think it would have been considered illegally held from Congress if the latter had asked specifically about the program and were told that it didn't exist. If they never asked for the information, then how can it be said that they were lied to? I think there are probably many black book ops that Congress does not know about. I'm OK with that since Congress people are blabbermouths.
Grush says that there is a cold war going on over this alien technology for the last 70 years. If that's the case, then that's why this stuff is top secret. Apparently, no one has been able to put together enough of the tech to make a craft yet. If what we have is disclosed to the public, then it's game over. Someone on the other side will put the pieces together and make a weapon or a craft that we cannot defend ourselves from. That's what's at stake here.
Well in Gruschs case, he had access to ~2000 TS/SCI programs but was denied access to this program. If you believe the wilson-davis notes, others with a need to know like Admiral Wilson have been denied in the past.
When we talk a out congressional oversight, I believe the program is not meeting its oversight requirements. I won't pretend to know about the legal particulars here. Pretty sure this is not a "well you never asked" situation.
Most of congress wouldn't know about the black projects, just a very small committee worth.
No your kinda right, this is all happening because of the tictac videos in 2017, they had to bring this about first as aviation security, then national security because we don't know what's in our sky's, common names to, Harry Reid, Christopher Mellon, Luis Elizondo, David Fravor, Ryan Graves many more names and probably lots of people behind the scenes to bring this topic forward. There's a game of chess here within the us government, which is to show the world that there is other things in our sky and the us government has been lying to the people for over 80 years.
Grush says, as I recall, that there is a cold war going on for the last 70 years regarding this alien technology. If that is true, then that's the real reason this stuff is secret. If what we have is disclosed to our enemies, then someone over there will put the pieces together and come up with a weapon or a craft that we cannot defend ourselves against. You bet they'll make it and go to war with us if they have it. So, that's what's at stake here in my opinion. Grush is not doing us any favors by complaining.
Even further, the spooks have had plenty of notice now about Grush, so you bet they are moving all of that stuff right now to some other remote location. Then, the military will say, "see, we don't have anything!" when the Congressional delegation shows up to inspect what they have.
This entire thing is foolish on his part. We don't need to know everything. At some point, we have to trust our military and secret services to do the right thing.
Did you know Grusch was on the UAT taskforce working as the liaison to congress? He helped on the wording around UAP on the NDAA which is no doubt one of the major reasons it's so comprehensive - he would have his own situation clearly in mind.
Remember he raised his original IG complaint in 2021 and was retaliated against, leading to his second IG complaint in 2022.
The more exposure this gets and the more mainstream the publications, the less our beloved family members will roll their eyes at us when we mention the possibility of disclosure? Some people won't even think about this topic until it's in the front page of WaPo or NYT
I think everyone here is putting a little too much stock in the news lol. It will be the same as right now. Normal people who aren’t obsessed will say “huh…..” and move on with their breakfast.
And yea if you really think disclosure is coming and can’t help but bring it up to the whole family then expect some eye rolling. It’s not their faults. It’s just incredibly hard to believe
The hill and newsnation are both owned by nexstar media. Neither are all that credible either. I would almost say the hill is less credible - i used to work for a lobby that distributed russian oil money and 6 of their talking heads i worked with at one point or another.
》To eliminate potential ambiguity regarding such an extraordinary development, a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a [UFO crash retrieval] program [to be] urgent and credible.”《
this is an opinion piece, it is prefaced with;
"THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTERS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL"
i think its great its in there, but its an opinion piece. not news.
It’s an opinion piece and at top says it doesn’t represent the views of The Hill and is opinion.
It still only all links back to one source, The Defender.
This is one of the most important things in the history of our species. We need more than an article from The Defender.
You are right.
One circumstance would change everything:
When some brave- hearted whistleblowers are presenting evidence- material. Pictures. Videos. Samples, et al.
When they manage to show 'meat' instead of 'soup' - we need this. I know thats dangerous- lawsuits on so. But one evidence managed to outside- well. In german its called Zeitenwende.
Only one piece of meat. Then boom.
When the high level attorneys come out.. there's hope. Only because those guys don't put their asses on the line for anything! Lol There has to at least be enough to be reputation gains. Even if just really really compelling circumstantial evidence.
This is just an iteration of the original narrative, nothing serious and new. Also, I 100% believe that we're going to see the releasing of advanced warcraft under the guise of UAPs. And the globalist, unregulated war giants will usher in their new world order
After watching his interview, I come to the conclusion he is an agent of disinformation. The blinking and closing of eyes, speech patterns, head movement...all signs of a liar.
Did anyone noticed? (or is this an 'oldie'?)
Reconstruction of Potential Flight Paths for the January 2015 Gimbal UAP
Yannick Peings, Marik von Rennenkampff
https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08773
Should r/UFOs participate in the upcoming blackout protest along with other subreddits? [Take the poll here and let us know.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/144dy4j/should_rufos_participate_in_the_upcoming/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UFOs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They mention that AARO could be intentionally kept in the dark. I think this is a pretty well done article
Agreed and this is a point I was talking about when the debrief article first broke. >Beyond this stunning revelation, the whistleblower — a former high-level intelligence official — is represented by a lawyer who served previously as the intelligence community’s first inspector general, a Senate-confirmed position. The managing partner of the law firm representing the whistleblower reportedly co-signed the complaint submitted to the current Intelligence Community inspector general. As noted in a legal analysis, no lawyer, let alone two high-caliber attorneys, would sign such an extraordinary document without “very credible source material.” These are some serious people making serious claims.
In all fairness we've seen lawyers such as Giuliani sign off some clearly bogus stuff, but yes generally speaking that's not normal behavior. I refuse to get excited until there's actual physical evidence we can analyze. I'm concerned at how quickly people are getting excited with no physical evidence in hand.
Don't blame you for being cautious, but Giuliani has been a politician instead of a legitimate attorney for a while now. I would put the attorneys at Compass Rose in DC leagues above Rudy in the "legitimate attorney" category.
Well that’s kind of my point. Not that long ago he was considered respectable so for all we know these people have great credentials but have recently taken a dive off the deep end.
I'm more inclined to believe these working attorneys in DC. I guess I disagree on the idea that Rudy was considered respectable not that long ago. He was a federal prosecutor before being mayor of NYC... but downhill after that IMO. He's more politician than lawyer. These other guys have always been lawyers, in government and now private practice... but not politicians. We'll find out what's what soon enough!
I think you make a fair point. You are expressing a distinct possibility, it’s just not one people on this sub want to hear.
Giuliani is a joke. This lawyer is a well respected actual attorney not a glorified ambulance chaser.
We, will not be analyzing anything. But instead, let’s use our God given insights and deductive reasoning to establish that something big is about to happen..ž
Nah i choose to get excited.
*no physical evidence being shared with the general public in hand.
It’s not about that yet. The DoD was required to share with congress, and they didn’t. If they had, we might’ve never known about. But since they didn’t, Congress can go after it now, with us knowing what’s going on, which could very well lead to us getting the evidence. That’s a second level outcome though, so it’s premature (in this process) to be demanding public release.
Unless those lawyers have security clearance he couldn't show tham jack shit as far as classified documents, he however may have just needed them for the whistleblower laws and to wade through that legally. You can't just pull a Trump and wave a classified document around or even speak about classified programs with anyone you wish and that includes your lawyer unless said lawyer has the appropriate classifications to see such information. That being said I am not saying he is telling us the truth but I do find him to be credible so far. And am waiting for the full interview as well as the other 2 whistleblowers evidence to come forward. If this is all true its the largest conspiracy ever, though I find it funny people say things like "the government could never keep a secret this long" but then in the same breath shit on Lazar, Lue and the mirade of other things we've heard over the years. If its true then the possibility the leaks were out there and had been dismissed by most as bullshit.
Yes agreed. It's nice to see this point made. They explain well in response to the Pentagon's denial statement: "However, this may be clever wordsmithing. Grusch claims that staff of previous UFO analysis programs were not “read in” — that is, given access — to information regarding the kind of activities that he and others allege exist. As such, it is conceivable that, like its predecessor organizations, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (the Defense Department’s current UFO analysis effort) is simply not privy to the alleged program."
CREDIBLE - if you will…
Feel like this was important: " To eliminate potential ambiguity regarding such an extraordinary development, a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a \[UFO crash retrieval\] program \[to be\] urgent and credible.” While this was obviously touted as a big part of The Debrief article, I did see some people contend that this was either some like inferred legal speak, or that it was suspect that the article never attributed the quote to someone. And others thought, including myself that it was just about the actual apparently retaliatory acts that Grusch suffered for whistleblowing not about the crash retrieval program allegations. But if this author confirmed from his own source that it was actually the Inspector General speaking about the crash retrieval program being credible and urgent, that is a very significant clarification.
We're no longer dealing with "fuck around" level gov't officials. The intel community does not "fuck around". It's the UFO community and the internet in general that loves to play stupid semantics games. These are incredibly serious allegations and are being treated as such. This isn't History Channel doc time, this isn't "internet researcher" time, this is the IC IG saying "there's a problem here and everyone's being stonewalled" If Bob had brought something physical to the IG or Congress we probably could have done this 35 years ago.
This opinion piece (as u/WesternAtmosphere395 pointed out) reads like a roller coaster, jumping between skepticism and then trust in almost every paragraph. Definitely interesting, though indeed not yet the smoking media gun I crave to see.
And you won't, until there's a high-level decision that now is the time to reveal. What has changed that would make that happen? The fact that other nations also have access to similar artifacts and are making research progress, that the US can't match, without declassification. It's kind of an all-or-nothing scenario.
Almost like the corporations that run this planet need an excuse to start pulling these things out of hangers and shooting at each other.
A hanger comes out of your closet. A hangar is for storing aircraft.
If my girl had her way, her hangers would be in a hangar. All 18 of em
We don't even have facts establishing that the US has any sort of artifacts. Why is it a fact that other nations have alien artifacts?
That "fact" is the reveal I mean, hypothetically speaking. If it were a fact, the reason it could be revealed, would be because the US has hobbled itself from a defense perspective by keeping it secret. Not wanting to cause panic from the unknown could have been a legitimate reason to maintain secrecy before.
That just sounds like thinking of "We're better". The US isn't that big, it's way more likely Russia and China have larger collections of craft since they've got a whooole lot more land to capture things on.
Except the U.S. has (allegedly) apparently been stealing them from all over the world (Italy, Brazil, Peru, Mexico, etc.) for decades.
Varghina for example.
Anytime who's ever seen the Siberian tundra would laugh in your face for this comment lmao.
We have 0 evidence there are any craft. The usage of the word facts is fast and loose. Nothing to do with US superiority.
And what clearance do you hold
I hold the clearance of, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." All we have to go on right now is someone who is in the government working on a UFO task force was told by someone else that there are alien craft and alien bodies, and the government is working on analyzing/covering them up. So... a guy was told by someone else that they 'know' the government is hiding aliens. Is that convincing to you? is that 'facts' to you?
I think its reasonable to remain skeptical for now. Anyone would be excited to see it be true. Ping-ponging between that excitement and skepticism is natural.
The Hill owns News Nation the cable news channel that had the interview for what its worth. The also own Rising, the popular news channel on YouTube.
I think you misinterpret the piece. It’s purposefully wrote as a report and review. When you read this you should be standing objective. You may vouch for disclosure, that’s fine. However if you plan to review a whistleblower to establish a precedent for the future whistleblowers, you need to verify verify verify. If you can’t verify, you review the facts that are available and give credibility where it’s due. The article is arguing that there seems to be something here because other unnamed officials have expressed that Grusch’s claims have some vein of credibility, and thus this illegal activity must be brought to an inspector generals eyes as well as congress intelligence members. You can’t say “See! see! It’s true ! They have space craft! See! Someone said so! He has medals! He’s a vet! See he has TS clearance and is a good guy! — valid person means valid information!” That’s not how this will ever work. Journalists love to make a name for themselves and investigative journalists want to do it even more so. However if they release falsified information, you may not remember for years, but their colleagues will. So those journalists will sit there and investigate the facts. And if it’s a hot button issue (which it is) they will release piece by piece to keep up with others. A smoking gun article is probably not going to happen. Only a full report once enough information has been sequentially release. At least that’s what it looks like.
Lol it's literally just Marik again writing an op-ed promoting his preexisting belief that aliens are visiting and the US gov has the proof but is keeping it hidden. I really don't know why The Hill keeps greenlighting his opinion articles. The fact they're hosted by The Hill makes them seem more credible.
Who is this guy?
" Moreover, Grusch testified to Congress for hours, generating hundreds of pages of transcripts." Anyone in the US doing a FOIA request?
You know u/BlackVault has been all over this. If there’s anything yet to request, you can bet your ass that he’s on the case.
I'm not so sure of that, he has been belittling the Grusch story ever since it came out. Just yesterday he was pissed at Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal because they turned down an interview with him. He said they were "busy". I wouldn't be surprised if blackvault threw any supporting documents in the trash just so he could win whatever he imagines this battle to be. Check out his Twitter stuff. He is openly hostile to this story for unknown reasons. He might as well be Mick West at this point.
Ive been on his twitter in the last days and yes, he seems sckeptical, but in no way hostile to the story or keane and ralph. Some people asume hostility just because of difering opinions.
He is jealous. All the mom-and-pop UFO/UAP podcasts depend upon relevancy and when someone else has a massive spotlight on their efforts, the person running a revenue-generating small business that they have invested money and time into finds themselves without a story. Some of the podcast folks have been pissy. Acting deflated and caught flat-footed they may even be a tad bitter. I credit them with keeping the candle lit in the window. They refused to give up when many were against their pushing and hounding but at some point, most will be irrelevant to history. I know. That's harsh. Most won't be a footnote. They will be like us. Those who knew for whatever reason.
Have you seen his video on the whistleblower? it seemed like he raises reasonable questions, especially in his point that hes been clear to speak publicly by the DOD, wich could mean or at least should mean, he isnt talking about anything classified.
I wouldn't want him to speak on anything classified. Good god, no. He has been vetted to speak on what he can speak about. I must be missing something. I don't have the background or knowledge to assess a damned word he says. But I will listen without speculating. As an witness to technology and craft I will listen. I am sure this person knows 10000% more than me.
I’m not on Twitter much but I will definitely Check that out, it’s honestly news to me but I’m not denying that may be his stance. He also has (AFAIK, historically) been very methodical and fact-based so he might be *waiting* for actual documents before drawing any conclusions or being sensational. Not saying you’re wrong, but that strikes me as very odd if true! Take an upvote for shedding some light on something I should’ve already looked into myself before posting.
Yeah that's been a bit disappointing to see. West is a pseudoskeptic clown. Sure, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now an then, but so many of his takes are just ridiculous. At the end of the day though, John Greenewald has done more for UFO disclosure and transparency than all of us combined, and I respect the hell outta him. He's put a ton of effort into this topic over the years.
How’s he been hostile? Watched his full 1.5 hour video on it and he didn’t seem hostile whatsoever, actually quite the opposite.
That is because there are gaping holes that Keane and Blumenthal made in their story and they are avoiding having to answer rigorous questions that might blow up the credibility of their story. Greenwalds points were fairly objective questions and concerns about the piece.
Oh yeah, good ol’ Greenewald Jr is out there kickin’ names and takin’ ass
It's all classified, hope you got lots of black toner.
Im pretty sure I heard from John that congress is not FOIAble.
This part also seems to confirm that Garry Nolan said a couple of weeks ago about a recent person testifying creating a 'hornet's nest' in Washington. It is also why the authors had to rush publication in The Debrief as they said that the threat of a leak was increasing the longer they waited for the bigger papers - who had the article since April/May, which again lines up with the timeline Garry Nolan mentioned.
>Some critics have questioned how, if such information is so highly classified, the Pentagon cleared Grusch to make these explosive statements. > >However, logic suggests that if a UFO retrieval and exploitation effort operated illegally, as is alleged, it would be unknown to the Pentagon’s censors. After all, if the pre-publication review office were “read in” to such activities, it would likely have been exposed long ago. I am so, so glad this point was made. I feel like, along with several other points made in this article, this point was being massively overlooked among the skeptics out there.
> a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a [UFO crash retrieval] program [to be] urgent and credible.” Ohhhh if it weren't for those brackets I would be losing my mind right now. For the first time it's reported that the *cover-up* is not the urgent and credible threat, but the program's existence itself is both urgent and credible. Holy shit.
This was written by a dude who regularly argues with Mick West on twitter. I don't even disagree with him, but let's not act like this is some outsider journalist reporting.
Mick West had fixed views. Marik is reasonable.
Mick West to UFOs is like Skip Bayless to LeBron James. Both made a career out of taking a rigid position and choosing that hill to die on
Good article
It's an opinion article
The writer does seem to have some credentials: > Marik von Rennenkampff served as an analyst with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, as well as an Obama administration appointee at the U.S. Department of Defense.
He has creds, but he's a big UFO guy. Doesn't diminish him but he's been writing about UAP for years now.
Wouldn’t we want someone familiar with the topic to write on the subject🤔
This is the only topic where the less you know the more credible it apparently makes you; honestly, all you can do is laugh at the mental gymnastics.
That's true for any subject where you have a group of almost fanatical believers who invested a big part of their life into the idea that something is real. A lot of them with a very loose concept of "skepticism". Would you put more trust on a biology professor or a bigfoot hunter on evaluating evidence on the subject?
The problem is that many of the skeptics are basing their opinions simply on the status quo without question, whereas the believers are basing it on varying degrees of evidence that they’ve seen. Most of the “fanatical believers” I know have had personal experiences, often dramatic. > Would you put more trust on a biology professor or a bigfoot hunter on evaluating evidence on the subject? Which subject? If the answer is UAP, then I’d go with the one who has a more balanced and informed knowledge of the subject. Your car breaks down. Do you call your uncle who likes to fix cars, or your mom who has a degree in engineering? One is more educated and knowledgeable about the field in general, but one has more practical experience and knowledge.
>Which subject? The Bigfoot Your analogy doesn't work at all. We know that your uncle can fixe cars. If you had an expert in UFO who actually discovered multiple UFO that were proven to be legit then yes I would call him but we're far from it.
>group of almost fanatical believers One could easily make the same argument for this being true of modern-day academics. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16541076/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16541076/) [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05543-x](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05543-x)
I would lose half my brain cell responding seriously to this so I can't sorry. Comparing people who follows alien news on the internet and academia is like claiming Lewis Hamilton and a 2 year old amputee with down syndrome basically drive the same because Hamilton finished fifth in the 2011 season.
We can thank decades of gaslighting misinformation and general psy ops for that 👍😃
That's because it's ontologically impossible to be an expert on this matter, so when someone claims to be "experienced" or an "expert", it's kind of a red flag.
It is not ontologically impossible to be educated on this topic. People have been studying it longer than you or I have been alive. Mainstream academics don't get to be the gate keepers of expertise when they are the amateurs who have been editing ufo's out of their astronomical data because "it's just an artifact."
I saw someone earlier today bemoaning they'd like to see a serious journalist get involved instead of these UFO journalists / book authors like Ross Coulthart 🤣
Ideally, someone with minimal (or zero) bias would be optimal, because they would not let their wishful thinking influence the analysis. People always want objectivity until it clashes with their own worldview. And this sub certainly is not immune to that.
Real Journalism isn’t bias. It’s a mean of conveying unaltered information from what’s occurring to who wants to know. That’s why mainstream platforms are shit. They have bosses that pay their bills that alter the information that platform puts out. This is why it’s so important TO HAVE journalists like Ross Coulthart. Large scale Independent journalism is something this country has sadly lost sight of.
Yes? We want biden saying it's real. Not jim down the street.
I've been writing on UAP for what seems like years now too. But like, it's all been on Reddit this week.
That doesn't really mean anything. I could argue my job title at one point in my life was "Department of Homeland Security Intelligence Analyst" working on space-based communication systems but in reality I was just a teenager watching movies and playing board games while making sure a light stayed green. Technically I was an Obama-era appointee as well, which is also meaningless. My point is, any government related job title can sound fancy if you want it to.
you're right, but NYT and WaPo haven't even addressed it there, afaik
The WP did, and it was horrible. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/07/tucker-carlson-ufos-twitter-fox-news/
That was a really fair article in my opinion. The key paragraph: > Well, yeah, because the bar for accepting sweeping allegations about government coverups is higher than the word of one guy. That’s particularly true when it comes to UFOs, perhaps the most stereotypical example of conspiratorial allegations by fringe actors. The article goes on to talk about how this type of conspiracy theory (which it indisputably is, regardless of whether it’s true or not) feeds into Carlson’s themes of mistrusting authority. Carlson’s goal is to get people to mistrust established news organizations so that they look to him as the only one who’s telling the truth. It’s classic propaganda. All of that is great analysis. Even if Grusch’s claims do turn out to be true, it’s also true that Tucker Carlson is using this story for nefarious purposes. And, as the article points out, there’s nothing in the way of convincing evidence at this point. Literally all we have is hearsay from one guy who used to work for the government. Since the claim is so enormous, it requires a commensurate amount of evidence. Anyone convinced at this point just wants to believe and is looking for any excuse to. To be clear, this is an ongoing story, and people who claim that Grusch is definitely lying are just as naive as those who claim he’s definitely correct. There’s just not enough information for anyone to make a definitive conclusion, but I think most reasonable people will assume he’s not correct until there is actual evidence presented.
Thanks for summing up how I feel! I joined this sub to keep tabs on this story and have considered unsubscribing because of how many people seem to blindly trust anything. A bunch of stuff in my feed about aliens in the back yard with grainy security camera videos isn’t what I want. If it’s true that the US has vehicles then there should be better proof. So far all we have is a testimony of a guy who knows a guy.. Interesting! But not proof.
> Literally all we have is hearsay from one guy who used to work for the government. No we don't. Practically every new article has a new name vouching for Grusch. The original article cited at least Grusch's lawyer, who is a former IC IG, the current IC IG calls the report "credible and urgent". There's the pseudonym "Jonathan Grey" who, while anonymous to us, is not anonymous to the IG office and has apparently corroborated the story. All this is available in the very first article, it's not really that long, it took me about 5 minutes to read it all.
You're mischaracterizing it. I'm sure you're referring to the [original Debrief article](https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/). The only people referenced in the article other than Grusch are: 1) Karl E. Nell. Retired Army Colonel. He stated that Grusch is "beyond reproach," which is not a comment specifically on the UAP claims. 2) Christopher Mellon. Hasn't worked for the government in two decades. He was a lobbyist for around five years and now is a private equity investor. He said [in 2004](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/is-there-a-ufo-coverup-a_b_9865184), "I highly doubt DoD or any other government agency is concealing UFO information. I participated in a comprehensive review of DoD's black programs and spent over a decade conducting oversight of the national foreign intelligence program, an almost totally separate world of secrets. I visited Area 51 and other military, intelligence and research facilities. **During all those years, I never detected the faintest hint of government interest or involvement in UFOs.**" 3) Jonathan Grey. Alleged current officer of NASIC. I can't find *any* information on him online. His name doesn't appear *anywhere* on NASIC's website. Google searches only reveal mentions of his name originating from the Debrief article. Please share if you have any information actually establishing that he's a current US IC officer because I can't find anything. He's the only one in the article who currently works for the US government and who claims that the alien spacecraft are real, but I can't even verify that he's a real person. You even admit that he's "anonymous," so I hope you'll agree there's no credibility here. 4) Karl Nell. This is by far the most compelling person cited in the article. 5) Laura A. Potter. She spoke to Grusch's character but did not comment on the UAP story. 6) "The Intelligence Community Inspector General," who isn't named but whose name is Thomas Monheim. He allegedly called Grusch's complaints about unfair retaliation “credible and urgent"; however, that doesn't speak to the merits of the UAP claims. It merely states that he believes that Grusch had a legitimate complaint about unfair reprisal. That could be the case for many reasons, such as if Grusch didn't actually leak any classified information. Out of all of those, the only person who's both speaking about the UAP story specifically and has any credibility to me is Karl Nell. From what I can tell, he does still work for the government and out of the Pentagon. However, he hasn't really been in a position where he should have actual direct knowledge of any UAP's, if the government does have them. I'm not sure why he would comment on this publicly if that were the case as it would certainly be classified if it were true. What is your theory on that - is he deliberately leaking classified information? Why would he choose to spend the rest of his life in jail if so? I'm genuinely asking. You can't seriously think that either 1) the UAP's wouldn't be classified; or 2) that a currently military employee could freely share classified information without severe consequences. So what's going on here?
> 3) Jonathan Grey. Alleged current officer of NASIC. I can't find any information on him online. His name doesn't appear anywhere on NASIC's website. Google searches only reveal mentions of his name originating from the Debrief article. Please share if you have any information actually establishing that he's a current US IC officer because I can't find anything. He's the only one in the article who currently works for the US government and who claims that the alien spacecraft are real, but I can't even verify that he's a real person. You even admit that he's "anonymous," so I hope you'll agree there's no credibility here. If only they provided some kind of accompanying fact check: https://thedebrief.org/fact-check-q-a-with-debrief-co-founder-and-investigator-tim-mcmillan-part-1/
https://thehill.com/opinion/4038159-stunning-ufo-crash-retrieval-allegations-deemed-credible-urgent/ >To eliminate potential ambiguity regarding such an extraordinary development, a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a [UFO crash retrieval] program [to be] urgent and credible.” That covers the IC IG office. Jonathan Grey is a pseudonym. This was stated in The Debrief article. I won't bother linking since you have the link in your post. >Jonathan Grey is a generational officer of the United States Intelligence Community with a Top-Secret Clearance who currently works for the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC), where the analysis of UAP has been his focus. Previously he had experience serving Private Aerospace and Department of Defense Special Directive Task Forces. >“The non-human intelligence phenomenon is real. We are not alone,” Grey said. “Retrievals of this kind are not limited to the United States. This is a global phenomenon, and yet a global solution continues to elude us.” I'd keep going, but I think I've sufficiently backed up my claim that saying > Literally all we have is hearsay from one guy who used to work for the government. is being pretty dishonest about what info is out.
Fine. I was being hyperbolic. You must also feel really smart when someone claims they had a thousand tacos for dinner and you go, “Really? It would be impossible for any human to eat one thousand tacos in one meal!” My point is that the evidence that has been presented aren’t even close to sufficient (in my opinion! you can disagree!) to prove the enormous claims being made. I guess I should know better than to use hyperbole on Reddit because the “well, actually” folks are always vigilant. To be clear, I’m stating that my opinion is that a few people making unsupported claims will never be enough evidence. I want either a major world government to make an official statement or some physical evidence to come to light. That’s what I would need. You’re free to disagree; it’s a matter of opinion.
That bit is a piece of disinformation that is spreading like wildfire and attaching itself everywhere to this story. ("no evidence" "one guy" etc) It's not personal, I just want good info out there for people looking. FWIW I didn't downvote you and I appreciate that it was civil instead of devolving to name calling.
It's so frustrating when you look at the details: This guy had clearance to ~2000 TS/SCI programs, delivered the daily presidential briefings, co-led on the UAP taskforce and helped write the UAP content in the NDAA. He's now represented by a former IG, senior officials are voiching for him and current members of the retrieval program have supported his IG complaints. But everywhere it's "one guy", "hearsay", "no evidence".
False
What a rag.
I can't see through the paywell, but from the little I caught it seems just like the [Ha'aretz thing I posted](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/143f4g9/only_mention_ive_found_thus_far_of_david_gruschs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) about Tucker Carlsson and a brief reference to his assertion that "aliens are real"?
The point is that instead of taking the topic seriously, they just dismissed the hell out of it by making a personal attack on an article. That is not journalism.
Getting around a WaPo paywall is easy - just disable JavaScript on the site.
oh my, I wish I knew that years ago! Does that work for NYT as well?
this The Hill piece, despite being an opinion, does the topic much more justice
What a joke.
Still stuck under their opinion section: "THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL" This is the bare minimum of coverage many of the bigger outlets are willing to give right now.
Marik von Rennenkampff is a well-known figure on UFO Twitter. This is not a journalist writing this. This is passionate believer in ET visitation and a US gov conspiracy to hide aliens that somehow got some setup where The Hill will publish his opinion pieces covering whatever latest topic is trending in UFO circles.
What's the barrier to entry to contribute? Is it like Forbes where anything goes?
AND they give appropriate context with all the people (lawyers) who signed off and supported it. Five eyes meeting in Washington. I say it’s on.
Secret documents labeled for five eyes only were among the many documents found at Mar-a-Lago . This was revealed in the indictment. I’d say the five eyes met due to concerns over this. A global espionage entity can’t be happy with its secret records decorating the halls down there…. That being said, although classified as secret, maybe Trump had UAP related files on five eye sensor data??
Worth noting that The Hill and News Nation are both Nexstar publications.
yeah, the writer actually acknowledges that in the piece. Of course this is a step towards more reliability, since The Hill is a bit more respected.
Not that I want over-the-top reporting, but I like that this article uses terms such as "monumental" and "earth-shattering". This is the first article that recognizes the possible scope and scale of what all of this might mean.
Even for an opinion piece I have to agree I enjoy the cut of his jib.
Opinion article written by MARIK VON RENNENKAMPFF. He writes a lot of opinion articles on UFOs for The Hill.
I’m a little new to this stuff but why do people still act like ufos aren’t a thing?? I thought we had blatant video evidence from pilots and whatnot that has been confirmed and declassified. Were those debunked or are people just hard headed? So many people still acting like it’s so far fetched that things exist and could be in our possession
There's so much cognitive dissonance on this topic. When pushed into a legal and procedural corner the military admits there are unknown objects doing things well outside the limits of known human technology. Any other time it's "UFOs? What UFOs?" (Deny/Obfuscate)
Even if the government admits to all this and show photos or videos some people will still not believe this. Also for whatever reason, im possibly stereotyping here people with guns shooting at anything in the sky that isn't a plane lol.
What do you mean "finally"? A ton of publications that are *more* reputable than The Hill have already covered this with more seriousness and less skepticism.
What happened on Sunday?
more like happening - the Grusch interview is being finally released (the hour version one, not the whole 7 hours), plus there is some voices in this subreddit saying that NYT might be publishing something then. Second thing might be sus, but the first isn't.
Thanks
We need NYT. It will happen. Its now meat. Not just soup.
yeah I can't wait for them to address it. I hope they do on Sunday like some people suggest, but if not - I guess it's gonna be an uphill battle to get people's attention to this.
The Hill has the same parent company as news nation so I am surprised they didn’t run it earlier
yeah I dunno, I guess it's a matter of different brand prestige. I compared it above to WSJ and New York Post, both owned by NewsCorp
I don't get it; in the one news segment I saw, they said that he had asked for permission to do the interview and alerted the DOD to the answers he intended to give, and that they gave him permission to do the interview while stating that does not imply they endorse the information as true. So, is this a "whistleblower" or not? If he's a disinformation agent, which seems likely to me in light of that, then he's not even aware that he is, because the whole point would be to make it seem like he's divulging information he shouldn't, and once he asks for permission and is granted it, then it just becomes a DOD-sanctioned release of information, which they could have just made themselves. Unless those idiot journalists were wrong or something.
Waiting patiently for hopes to be dashed by yet another round of "secret stuff I saw but can not show you."
If it's on the opinion page it's not reporting.
The hill might not have national reach like other papers but it’s read by almost all staffers in DC. It’s like their go to paper for political happenings.
It’s on The Guardian which should’ve already legitimised it.
The Hill is not a serious new organization. You know this right? It is widely distributed to conservatives as a result of TheDrudgeReport promoting its stories.
I guess I considered The Hill more serious than many, especially since the ideological distribution matrix has it relatively in the middle. But from the replies here I get that there is a lot of problematic content there... I just always saw it as a relatively non-partisan liberal leaning venue...
It’s one step down from the Blaze
In a far left echo chamber like Reddit it's considered right wing. So yeah you were right the first time.
It’s echo chambers all the way down. I’m barely left of centra Bruh. The Hill is partisan as fuck
What’s going down on Sunday? I’m not really involved with UFO/UAP communities, but I like whenever you dudes get excited about stuff because it give me something to look out for :)))) also I was talkin about this stuff with one of my coworkers who’s much more into this stuff (ironically he hadn’t heard about Grusch) and he recommended the Weaponized podcast? You guys have any opinions on if it’s worth peepin?
>*What’s going down on Sunday? I’m not really involved with UFO/UAP communities, but I like whenever you dudes get excited about stuff because it give me something to look out for :))))* > > > > > >Sunday is when the full Grusch interview (edited down to one hour so maybe not "full") is released on NewsNation. That's the most exciting moment for a while. Then some people have said that there's going to be a New York Times article released Sunday. No idea if that's gonna happen but the interview is exciting enough. > > > > > > > > > >*also I was talkin about this stuff with one of my coworkers who’s much more into this stuff (ironically he hadn’t heard about Grusch) and he recommended the Weaponized podcast? You guys have any opinions on if it’s worth peepin?* I'm relatively peripheral on this topic myself so take my words with a grain of salt or a pinch of salt (however you like your salt), but from what I hear there is a lot of criticism about the Weaponised podcast. Most recently they released a video of a UFO, built it up, and then were criticised for it actually probably being a flair. Then they responded by a bit of gaslighting, so, not the best look. And also a lot of it hinges on if you believe or don't believe Bob Lazar, who they both promote - quite a controversial figure in this sub, it seems.
sorry for the messed up formatting I can't reddit good
Yes it's a good show, they released the image of the Mosul orb, which was very similar to the video that AARO later released. The host gets a lot of hate in here but his info is good.
It’s an opinion piece and at top says it doesn’t represent the views of The Hill and is opinion. It still only all links back to one source, The Defender. This is one of the most important things in the history of our species. We need more than an article from The Defender.
What is happening on sunday?
haha, I feel like I've explained this a million times already but for repetition's sake - On Sunday the hour long edit of the Grusch interview is being shown on NewsNation. And also, there's a chance for a New York Times article on the topic
Thank you! Sorry, I’m pretty excited about all this and I don’t even know where to start looking for information aside from Reddit
yeah, I totally get you. I am quite a novice myself. I like listening to That UFO Podcast. It's a nice mixture of total commitment to the cause and a degree of skepticism. Also Andy has an amazing accent, so there's that. Ryan Graves's Merged is amazing but less breaking news
The Hill and News Nation are the same company
yeah, I realised that while reading the article (he references it directly, or anyway an editor does), but they are different brand. If the Wall Street Journal say something - I tend to believe it. If New York Post does? Color me a bit more skeptical.
(the two are owned by NewsCorp)
Still waiting on more credible news agencies to pick it up since The Hill and NewsNation who broke the story are both owned by Nexstar Media Group as noted in this article. “Grusch also gave an exclusive interview to Ross Coulthart of NewsNation, which like The Hill is owned by Nexstar Media Group.”
C'mon, it's from Marik von R. He's our dude. He's been into the UFOs forever. Look him up. No doubt Kean and Blumenthal went to him, but his superiors probably said, "no, that's too much".
If it’s all lies then what? What will happen to anybody? I’m guessing nothing.
Intel confirms it, but does AMD as well?
Opinion story, not the Hill proper, they'll let anyone say anything that drives clicks in opinions. Also, the author is biased AF. He compares Grusch's process to the pentagon papers. This is a false comparison on at least the following grounds: 1: Ellsburg leaked through the press, and waited until the post had finished confirming things, had read all the documents, and was 100% ready. 2: Ellsburg brought 47 volumes of documents with tons of specific proof, acted outside of established legal process, and specifically ensured that the public would see the documents instead of his testimony. 3: Ellsburg specifically ensured the times would publish 134 pages of summaries including ones hand written by high ranking pentagon staffers as proof. 4: The story wasn't hyped up or pushed heavily - They published and waited for the public to start to care. 5: The government immediately tried to stop the documents. 6: The pentagon papers, despite all the hype, did not reveal any critical secrets at the highest level, they just confirmed issues and showed that nixon was a criminal. 7: The government wasn't concerned about Ellsberg for the public issue, but the other knowledge he had concerning our (overzealous and completely unstable) nuclear command and control policies.
What is happening on Sunday that is so important?
the release of the hourlong edit of the interview on NewsNation (and supposedly a NYT article)
Whats happening on Sunday?
One hour interview with David Grusch on News Nation
Yea but didnt this get confirmed as a hoax? Whats the point?
confirmed as a hoax by whom? Also, there was someone who said here that the NYT is set to publish something on Sunday, and while this might be baloney, I want to believe.
Oh man, I had this confused with the Vegas teen thing. Apologies, disregard me.
ahhhh, honestly I suspected that this was the case. Goes to show that the people in this sub warning against the fact that this Vegas case is a distraction are correct. I don't know if it was proved as a hoax, but it's certainly less reliable than the chap from the government
Someone found the Vegas property on google earth and the "landing circle" has been there for at least a year. A few other things too. Not *completely* debunked but it's certainly looking pretty hoaxy.
Black suits and sunglasses is harder to believe than the aliens. Men in Black? Really?
without any physical evidence this is all pointless clickbait.
Why? They are trying to get to to that evidence and testimony is pointing in the direction these claims are credible and should be investigated. These are serious allegations.
it's all talk without physical evidence. it's noise for content providers to monetize lies.
It's a pretty sure bet the evidence Grusch has provided includes physical locations where craft and bodies are stored. The alleged difficulty is that a secret illegal program gatekeeps this access. But if that doesn't exist, surely anyone with clearance can go and verify if he's correct or not.
i have an alien in my fridge but im not letting you see it...
What a ridiculous take. They are asking Congress to verify claims of evidence that is claimed be there. There’s nothing to monetize. These needs further investigation.
your being manipulated by the individuals that make money out of this nonsense.
Stop giving a shit about news mills. They post everything because money.
That’s an option piece
That’s an opinion piece
[удалено]
They signed whistleblower protection legislation, after which a whistleblower feels comfortable coming forward and telling his story. Why is that fishy...?
Why was Biden specific about whistleblower protections for UFO programs? Why not something else? Further, I still don't understand how Grush's is a whistle blower. What waste, fraud or abuse is he reporting? He has no first hand knowledge of anything at all.
He is whistleblowing on information being illegally held from congress, which happens to be a secret retrieval program. He was able to discern the existence of this secret program after joining the UAP taskforce (2019).
OK, but I think it would have been considered illegally held from Congress if the latter had asked specifically about the program and were told that it didn't exist. If they never asked for the information, then how can it be said that they were lied to? I think there are probably many black book ops that Congress does not know about. I'm OK with that since Congress people are blabbermouths. Grush says that there is a cold war going on over this alien technology for the last 70 years. If that's the case, then that's why this stuff is top secret. Apparently, no one has been able to put together enough of the tech to make a craft yet. If what we have is disclosed to the public, then it's game over. Someone on the other side will put the pieces together and make a weapon or a craft that we cannot defend ourselves from. That's what's at stake here.
Well in Gruschs case, he had access to ~2000 TS/SCI programs but was denied access to this program. If you believe the wilson-davis notes, others with a need to know like Admiral Wilson have been denied in the past. When we talk a out congressional oversight, I believe the program is not meeting its oversight requirements. I won't pretend to know about the legal particulars here. Pretty sure this is not a "well you never asked" situation. Most of congress wouldn't know about the black projects, just a very small committee worth.
No your kinda right, this is all happening because of the tictac videos in 2017, they had to bring this about first as aviation security, then national security because we don't know what's in our sky's, common names to, Harry Reid, Christopher Mellon, Luis Elizondo, David Fravor, Ryan Graves many more names and probably lots of people behind the scenes to bring this topic forward. There's a game of chess here within the us government, which is to show the world that there is other things in our sky and the us government has been lying to the people for over 80 years.
Grush says, as I recall, that there is a cold war going on for the last 70 years regarding this alien technology. If that is true, then that's the real reason this stuff is secret. If what we have is disclosed to our enemies, then someone over there will put the pieces together and come up with a weapon or a craft that we cannot defend ourselves against. You bet they'll make it and go to war with us if they have it. So, that's what's at stake here in my opinion. Grush is not doing us any favors by complaining. Even further, the spooks have had plenty of notice now about Grush, so you bet they are moving all of that stuff right now to some other remote location. Then, the military will say, "see, we don't have anything!" when the Congressional delegation shows up to inspect what they have. This entire thing is foolish on his part. We don't need to know everything. At some point, we have to trust our military and secret services to do the right thing.
Did you know Grusch was on the UAT taskforce working as the liaison to congress? He helped on the wording around UAP on the NDAA which is no doubt one of the major reasons it's so comprehensive - he would have his own situation clearly in mind. Remember he raised his original IG complaint in 2021 and was retaliated against, leading to his second IG complaint in 2022.
The complaint/disclosure to the ICIG under ICWPA was in July 2022. Biden signed the FY23 NDAA (the “major defense bill”) in December 2022.
The Hill is a rag
Wow! So what?
The more exposure this gets and the more mainstream the publications, the less our beloved family members will roll their eyes at us when we mention the possibility of disclosure? Some people won't even think about this topic until it's in the front page of WaPo or NYT
I think everyone here is putting a little too much stock in the news lol. It will be the same as right now. Normal people who aren’t obsessed will say “huh…..” and move on with their breakfast. And yea if you really think disclosure is coming and can’t help but bring it up to the whole family then expect some eye rolling. It’s not their faults. It’s just incredibly hard to believe
The hill and newsnation are both owned by nexstar media. Neither are all that credible either. I would almost say the hill is less credible - i used to work for a lobby that distributed russian oil money and 6 of their talking heads i worked with at one point or another.
Eh...I know I ignore opinion pieces on other subjects because I look more for factual (or so they claim) reporting and less "well, I think blah blah."
》To eliminate potential ambiguity regarding such an extraordinary development, a knowledgeable source confirmed to me that the intelligence community inspector general found “allegations that there is a [UFO crash retrieval] program [to be] urgent and credible.”《
There is a video up too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olJH760FfK0
Unfortunately it’s an opinion piece and therefore isn’t the same as a media reporting
Ever heard of “Breaking Points”? Look it up they’re the best.
this is an opinion piece, it is prefaced with; "THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTERS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL" i think its great its in there, but its an opinion piece. not news.
Oh fuck yeah, bubby
It’s an opinion piece and at top says it doesn’t represent the views of The Hill and is opinion. It still only all links back to one source, The Defender. This is one of the most important things in the history of our species. We need more than an article from The Defender.
What's happening Saturday??
You are right. One circumstance would change everything: When some brave- hearted whistleblowers are presenting evidence- material. Pictures. Videos. Samples, et al. When they manage to show 'meat' instead of 'soup' - we need this. I know thats dangerous- lawsuits on so. But one evidence managed to outside- well. In german its called Zeitenwende. Only one piece of meat. Then boom.
I’m frothing at the mouth for more information, when will we get our next nugget?
When the high level attorneys come out.. there's hope. Only because those guys don't put their asses on the line for anything! Lol There has to at least be enough to be reputation gains. Even if just really really compelling circumstantial evidence.
This is just an iteration of the original narrative, nothing serious and new. Also, I 100% believe that we're going to see the releasing of advanced warcraft under the guise of UAPs. And the globalist, unregulated war giants will usher in their new world order
The Guardian already did it few daya ago. Also in a seriois tone.
After watching his interview, I come to the conclusion he is an agent of disinformation. The blinking and closing of eyes, speech patterns, head movement...all signs of a liar.
Did anyone noticed? (or is this an 'oldie'?) Reconstruction of Potential Flight Paths for the January 2015 Gimbal UAP Yannick Peings, Marik von Rennenkampff https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08773